↓ Skip to main content

Validation of a Lower Back “Wearable”-Based Sit-to-Stand and Stand-to-Sit Algorithm for Patients With Parkinson's Disease and Older Adults in a Home-Like Environment

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
129 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
Validation of a Lower Back “Wearable”-Based Sit-to-Stand and Stand-to-Sit Algorithm for Patients With Parkinson's Disease and Older Adults in a Home-Like Environment
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, August 2018
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2018.00652
Pubmed ID
Authors

Minh H. Pham, Elke Warmerdam, Morad Elshehabi, Christian Schlenstedt, Lu-Marie Bergeest, Maren Heller, Linda Haertner, Joaquim J. Ferreira, Daniela Berg, Gerhard Schmidt, Clint Hansen, Walter Maetzler

Abstract

Introduction: Impaired sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit movements (postural transitions, PTs) in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) and older adults (OA) are associated with risk of falling and reduced quality of life. Inertial measurement units (IMUs, also called "wearables") are powerful tools to monitor PT kinematics. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate an algorithm, based on a single IMU positioned at the lower back, for PT detection and description in the above-mentioned groups in a home-like environment. Methods: Four PD patients (two with dyskinesia) and one OA served as algorithm training group, and 21 PD patients (16 without and 5 with dyskinesia) and 11 OA served as test group. All wore an IMU on the lower back and were videotaped while performing everyday activities for 90-180 min in a non-standardized home-like environment. Accelerometer and gyroscope signals were analyzed using discrete wavelet transformation (DWT), a six degrees-of-freedom (DOF) fusion algorithm and vertical displacement estimation. Results: From the test group, 1,001 PTs, defined by video reference, were analyzed. The accuracy of the algorithm for the detection of PTs against video observation was 82% for PD patients without dyskinesia, 47% for PD patients with dyskinesia and 85% for OA. The overall accuracy of the PT direction detection was comparable across groups and yielded 98%. Mean PT duration values were 1.96 s for PD patients and 1.74 s for OA based on the algorithm (p < 0.001) and 1.77 s for PD patients and 1.51 s for OA based on clinical observation (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Validation of the PT detection algorithm in a home-like environment shows acceptable accuracy against the video reference in PD patients without dyskinesia and controls. Current limitations are the PT detection in PD patients with dyskinesia and the use of video observation as the video reference. Potential reasons are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 129 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 17%
Student > Master 16 12%
Researcher 11 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 9%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Other 21 16%
Unknown 37 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 16%
Engineering 20 16%
Neuroscience 14 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 9%
Computer Science 5 4%
Other 14 11%
Unknown 44 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 11 August 2018.
All research outputs
#13,046,322
of 23,099,576 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#4,885
of 12,015 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,495
of 331,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#110
of 306 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,099,576 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,015 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 331,118 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 306 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.