ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2025
AI-driven balance evaluation: a comparative study between blind and non-blind individuals using the mini-BESTest.
Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Automated assessment of balance function based on a lightweight end-to-end multimodal deep learning framework: predicting Mini-BESTest scores from center of pressure signals in a single stance condition.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are 2.2 billion visually impaired individuals and 285 million blind people worldwide. The vestibular system plays a fundamental role in the balance of a person related to sight and hearing, and thus blind people require physical therapy to improve their balance. Several clinical tests have been developed to evaluate balance, such as the mini-BESTest. This test has been used to evaluate the balance of people with neurological diseases, but there have been no studies that evaluate the balance of blind individuals before. Furthermore, despite the scoring of these tests being not subjective, the performance of some activities are subject to the physiotherapist's bias. Tele-rehabilitation is a growing field that aims to provide physical therapy to people with disabilities. Among the technologies used in tele-rehabilitation are inertial measurement units that can be used to monitor the balance of individuals. The amount of data collected by these devices is large and the use of deep learning models can help in analyzing these data. Therefore, the objective of this study is to analyze for the first time the balance of blind individuals using the mini-BESTest and inertial measurement units and to identify the activities that best differentiate between blind and sighted individuals. We use the OpenSense RT monitoring device to collect data from the inertial measurement unit, and we develop machine learning and deep learning models to predict the score of the most relevant mini-BESTest activities. In this study 29 blind and sighted individuals participated. The one-legged stance is the activity that best differentiates between blind and sighted individuals. An analysis on the acceleration data suggests that the evaluation of physiotherapists is not completely adjusted to the test criterion. Cluster analysis suggests that inertial data are not able to distinguish between three levels of evaluation. However, the performance of our models shows an F1-score of 85.6% in predicting the score evaluated by the mini-BESTest in a binary classification problem. The results of this study can help physiotherapists have a more objective evaluation of the balance of their patients and to develop tele-rehabilitation systems for blind individuals.
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.