↓ Skip to main content

Test–retest reliability of Kinect’s measurements for the evaluation of upper body recovery of stroke patients

Overview of attention for article published in BioMedical Engineering OnLine, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
160 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Test–retest reliability of Kinect’s measurements for the evaluation of upper body recovery of stroke patients
Published in
BioMedical Engineering OnLine, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12938-015-0070-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

A Mobini, S Behzadipour, M Saadat

Abstract

Performance indices provide quantitative measures for the quality of motion, and therefore, assist in analyzing and monitoring patients' progress. Measurement of performance indices requires costly devices, such as motion capture systems. Recent developments of sensors for game controllers, such as Microsoft Kinect, have motivated many researchers to develop affordable systems for performance measurement applicable to home and clinical care. In this work, the capability of Kinect in finding motion performance indices was assessed by analyzing intra-session and inter-session test-retest reliability. Eighteen stroke patients and twelve healthy subjects participated in this investigation. The intra-session and inter-session reliability of eight performance indices, namely mean velocity (MV), normalized mean speed (NMS), normalized speed peaks (NSP), logarithm of dimensionless jerk (LJ), curvature (C), spectral arc length (SAL), shoulder angle (SA), and elbow angle (EA), were assessed using intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM) and coefficient of variation (CV). The results showed that, among the performance indices, MV, LJ, C, SA and EA have more than 0.9 ICC together with an acceptable SEM and CV in both stroke patients and healthy subjects. Comparing the results of different therapy sessions showed that MV, LJ and C are more sensitive than other indices, and hence, more capable of reflecting the progress of a patient during the rehabilitation process. The results of this study shows acceptable reliability and sensitivity across the sessions for MV, LJ and C measured by Kinect for both healthy subjects and stroke patients. The results are promising for the development of home-based rehabilitation systems, which can analyze patient's movements using Kinect as an affordable motion capture sensor.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 160 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 157 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 16%
Student > Bachelor 20 13%
Researcher 17 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 5%
Other 25 16%
Unknown 33 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 13%
Engineering 20 13%
Computer Science 15 9%
Neuroscience 13 8%
Other 32 20%
Unknown 39 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 March 2016.
All research outputs
#14,380,194
of 24,167,226 outputs
Outputs from BioMedical Engineering OnLine
#362
of 849 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,354
of 268,500 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioMedical Engineering OnLine
#10
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,167,226 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 849 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 268,500 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.