Motion Tracking of Daily Living and Physical Activities in Health Care: Systematic Review From Designers’ Perspective
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Motion tracking technologies serve as crucial links between physical activities and health care insights, facilitating data acquisition essential for analyzing and intervening in physical activity. Yet, systematic methodologies for evaluating motion tracking data, especially concerning user activity recognition in health care applications, remain underreported. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to systematically review motion tracking in daily living and physical activities, emphasizing the critical interaction among devices, users, and environments from a design perspective, and to analyze the process involved in health care application research. It intends to delineate the design and application intricacies in health care contexts, focusing on enhancing motion tracking data's accuracy and applicability for health monitoring and intervention strategies. METHODS: Using a systematic review, this research scrutinized motion tracking data and their application in health care and wellness, examining studies from Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCO, and PubMed databases. The review used actor network theory and data-enabled design to understand the complex interplay between humans, devices, and environments within these applications. RESULTS: Out of 1501 initially identified studies, 54 (3.66%) were included for in-depth analysis. These articles predominantly used accelerometer and gyroscope sensors (n=43, 80%) to monitor and analyze motion, demonstrating a strong preference for these technologies in capturing both dynamic and static activities. While incorporating portable devices (n=11, 20%) and multisensor configurations (n=16, 30%), the application of sensors across the body (n=15, 28%) and within physical spaces (n=17, 31%) highlights the diverse applications of motion tracking technologies in health care research. This diversity reflects the application's alignment with activity types ranging from daily movements to specialized scenarios. The results also reveal a diverse participant pool, including the general public, athletes, and specialized groups, with a focus on healthy individuals (n=31, 57%) and athletes (n=14, 26%). Despite this extensive application range, the focus primarily on laboratory-based studies (n=39, 72%) aimed at professional uses, such as precise activity identification and joint functionality assessment, emphasizes a significant challenge in translating findings from controlled environments to the dynamic conditions of everyday physical activities. CONCLUSIONS: This study's comprehensive investigation of motion tracking technology in health care research reveals a significant gap between the methods used for data collection and their practical application in real-world scenarios. It proposes an innovative approach that includes designers in the research process, emphasizing the importance of incorporating data-enabled design framework. This ensures that motion data collection is aligned with the dynamic and varied nature of daily living and physical activities. Such integration is crucial for developing health applications that are accessible, intuitive, and tailored to meet diverse user needs. By leveraging a multidisciplinary approach that combines design, engineering, and health sciences, the research opens new pathways for enhancing the usability and effectiveness of health technologies.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,005 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».