Telemonitoring of Home-Based Biking Exercise: Assessment of Wireless Interfaces
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Telerehabiliation has been shown to have great potential in expanding access to rehabilitation services, enhancing patients' quality of life, and improving clinical outcomes. Stationary biking exercise can serve as an effective aerobic component of home-based physical rehabilitation programs. Remote monitoring of biking exercise provides necessary safeguards to ensure exercise adherence and safety in patients' homes. The scalability of the current remote monitoring of biking exercise solutions is impeded by the high cost that limits patient access to these services, especially among older adults with chronic health conditions. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this project was to design and test two low-cost wireless interfaces for the telemonitoring of home-based biking exercise. METHODS: We designed an interactive biking system (iBikE) that comprises a tablet PC and a low-cost bike. Two wireless interfaces to monitor the revolutions per minute (RPM) were built and tested. The first version of the iBikE system uses Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) to send information from the iBikE to the PC tablet, and the second version uses a Wi-Fi network for communication. Both systems provide patients and their clinical teams the capability to monitor exercise progress in real time using a simple graphical representation. The bike can be used for upper or lower limb rehabilitation. We developed two tablet applications with the same graphical user interfaces between the application and the bike sensors but with different communication protocols (BLE and Wi-Fi). For testing purposes, healthy adults were asked to use an arm bike for three separate subsessions (1 minute each at a slow, medium, and fast pace) with a 1-minute resting gap. While collecting speed values from the iBikE application, we used a tachometer to continuously measure the speed of the bikes during each subsession. Collected data were later used to assess the accuracy of the measured data from the iBikE system. RESULTS: Collected RPM data in each subsession (slow, medium, and fast) from the iBikE and tachometer were further divided into 4 categories, including RPM in every 10-second bin (6 bins), RPM in every 20-second bin (3 bins), RPM in every 30-second bin (2 bins), and RPM in each 1-minute subsession (60 seconds, 1 bin). For each bin, the mean difference (iBikE and tachometer) was then calculated and averaged for all bins in each subsession. We saw a decreasing trend in the mean RPM difference from the 10-second to the 1-minute measurement. For the 10-second measurements during the slow and fast cycling, the mean discrepancy between the wireless interface and tachometer was 0.67 (SD 0.24) and 1.22 (SD 0.67) for the BLE iBike, and 0.66 (SD 0.48) and 0.87 (SD 0.91) for the Wi-Fi iBike system, respectively. For the 1-minute measurements during the slow and fast cycling, the mean discrepancy between the wireless interface and tachometer was 0.32 (SD 0.26) and 0.66 (SD 0.83) for the BLE iBike, and 0.21 (SD 0.21) and 0.47 (SD 0.52) for the Wi-Fi iBike system, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that a low-cost wireless interface provides the necessary accuracy for the telemonitoring of home-based biking exercise.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».