ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2024
Referent data for investigations of upper limb accelerometry: harmonized data from three cohorts of typically-developing children.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advancing Neurorehabilitation and Recovery Through Human Movement Quantification via Wearable Sensing.Neurorehabilitation and neural repair · 2026Article
- Use of Wearable Sensors to Measure Improvements in Real World Upper Extremity Activity After Brachial Plexus Reconstruction.The Journal of hand surgery · 2026Article
- Assessing movement quality in individuals with Duchenne muscular dystrophy utilizing accelerometry: Comparisons with healthy controls.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Advancing Wrist-Worn Accelerometry for Measurement of Infant Motor Behavior.Developmental psychobiology · 2025Article
- Replication of Sensor-Based Categorization of Upper-Limb Performance in Daily Life in People Post Stroke and Generalizability to Other Populations.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Aim: The rise of wearable sensing technology shows promise for addressing the challenges of measuring motor behavior in pediatric populations. The current pediatric wearable sensing literature is highly variable with respect to the number of sensors used, sensor placement, wearing time, and how data extracted from the sensors are analyzed. Many studies derive conceptually similar variables via different calculation methods, making it hard to compare across studies and clinical populations. In hopes of moving the field forward, this report provides referent upper limb wearable sensor data from accelerometers on 25 variables in typically-developing children, ages 3-17 years. Methods: This is a secondary analysis of data from three pediatric cohorts of children 3-17 years of age. Participants ( Results: The majority of variables were similar on the dominant and non-dominant sides, declined slightly with age, and were not different between boys and girls. ICC values were moderate to excellent. Variation within individuals across days generally ranged from 3% to 32%. A web-based R shiny object is available for data viewing. Interpretation: With the use of wearable movement sensors increasing rapidly, these data provide key, referent information for researchers as they design studies, and analyze and interpret data from neurodevelopmental and other pediatric clinical populations. These data may be of particularly high value for pediatric rare diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.