Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39803896›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2025

Predicting Age and Visual-Motor Integration Using Origami Photographs: Deep Learning Study.

Chien-Yu Huang, Yen-Ting Yu, Kuan-Lin Chen, Jenn-Jier Lien, Gong-Hong Lin, Ching-Lin Hsieh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Chien-Yu HuangSchool of Occupational Therapy, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-4024-9906
Yen-Ting YuSchool of Occupational Therapy, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-5967-8655
Kuan-Lin ChenDepartment of Occupational Therapy, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0001-9996-814X
Jenn-Jier LienDepartment of Computer Science and Information Engineering, College of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0003-3944-7523
Gong-Hong LinInternational PhD Program in Gerontology and Long-Term Care, School of Nursing, Taipei Medical University, No. 250 Wu-Xing Street, Taipei, 11031, Taiwan, 886 2-27361661 ext 3614.ORCID 0000-0001-6369-7165
Ching-Lin HsiehSchool of Occupational Therapy, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0001-9468-9969

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Origami is a popular activity among preschool children and can be used by therapists as an evaluation tool to assess children's development in clinical settings. It is easy to implement, appealing to children, and time-efficient, requiring only simple materials-pieces of paper. Furthermore, the products of origami may reflect children's ages and their visual-motor integration (VMI) development. However, therapists typically evaluate children's origami creations based primarily on their personal background knowledge and clinical experience, leading to subjective and descriptive feedback. Consequently, the effectiveness of using origami products to determine children's age and VMI development lacks empirical support. Objective: This study had two main aims. First, we sought to apply artificial intelligence (AI) techniques to origami products to predict children's ages and VMI development, including VMI level (standardized scores) and VMI developmental status (typical, borderline, or delayed). Second, we explored the performance of the AI models using all combinations of photographs taken from different angles. Methods: A total of 515 children aged 2-6 years were recruited and divided into training and testing groups at a 4:1 ratio. Children created origami dogs, which were photographed from 8 different angles. The Beery-Buktenica Developmental Test of Visual-Motor Integration, 6th Edition, was used to assess the children's VMI levels and developmental status. Three AI models-ResNet-50, XGBoost, and a multilayer perceptron-were combined sequentially to predict age z scores and VMI z scores using the training group. The trained models were then tested using the testing group, and the accuracy of the predicted VMI developmental status was also calculated. Results: The R2 of the age and the VMI trained models ranged from 0.50 to 0.73 and from 0.50 to 0.66, respectively. The AI models that obtained an R2>0.70 for the age model and an R2>0.60 for the VMI model were selected for model testing. Those models were further examined for the accuracy of the VMI developmental status, the correlations, and the mean absolute error (MAE) of both the age and the VMI models. The accuracy of the VMI developmental status was about 71%-76%. The correlations between the final predicted age z score and the real age z score ranged from 0.84 to 0.85, and the correlations of the final predicted VMI z scores to the real z scores ranged from 0.77 to 0.81. The MAE of the age models ranged from 0.42 to 0.46 and those of the VMI models ranged from 0.43 to 0.48. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that AI techniques have a significant potential for predicting children's development. The insights provided by AI may assist therapists in better interpreting children's performance in activities.

Indexed as

Child DevelopmentDeep LearningPhotographyAge FactorsChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansMaleactivity performanceartificial intelligencechild developmentchild development screeningchildrendeep learningdevelopmental statusorigamivisual motor integration

Identifiers

PMID39803896
PMCPMC11741510

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.