ReviewJournal of imaging2026
A Comprehensive Review of SLR Systems: Challenges, Datasets, and Unresolved Gaps.
Review in Journal of imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
With the rapid advancement of sensor technologies, automated sign language recognition (SLR) has emerged as a critical enabler of inclusive communication systems for individuals with hearing and speech impairments. Although substantial research effort has been directed toward this domain, existing reviews lack a structured comparison of sensing modalities and do not systematically address the challenges of low-resource sign languages. This paper presents a comprehensive systematic review of sensor-based and multimodal SLR systems, covering 76 publications from 2021 to 2026 selected through a PRISMA 2020 protocol. We propose an original four-category taxonomy encompassing wearable sensor-based, contactless non-visual, vision-based, and multimodal systems, and provide a three-category methodological classification distinguishing conventional, machine learning, and deep learning approaches. The comparative analysis reveals that, despite notable progress, critical challenges persist: the absence of standardized datasets, limited cross-user generalization, insufficient multimodal fusion strategies, and inadequate representation of low-resource sign languages, including Kazakh Sign Language (KSL). The findings of this review establish a structured foundation for future research aimed at developing robust, scalable, and computationally efficient SLR systems.
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.