The Use of Artificial Intelligence and Wearable Inertial Measurement Units in Medicine: Systematic Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) has already revolutionized the analysis of image, text, and tabular data, bringing significant advances across many medical sectors. Now, by combining with wearable inertial measurement units (IMUs), AI could transform health care again by opening new opportunities in patient care and medical research. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to evaluate the integration of AI models with wearable IMUs in health care, identifying current applications, challenges, and future opportunities. The focus will be on the types of models used, the characteristics of the datasets, and the potential for expanding and enhancing the use of this technology to improve patient care and advance medical research. METHODS: This study examines this synergy of AI models and IMU data by using a systematic methodology, following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, to explore 3 core questions: (1) Which medical fields are most actively researching AI and IMU data? (2) Which models are being used in the analysis of IMU data within these medical fields? (3) What are the characteristics of the datasets used for in this fields? RESULTS: The median dataset size is of 50 participants, which poses significant limitations for AI models given their dependency on large datasets for effective training and generalization. Furthermore, our analysis reveals the current dominance of machine learning models in 76% on the surveyed studies, suggesting a preference for traditional models like linear regression, support vector machine, and random forest, but also indicating significant growth potential for deep learning models in this area. Impressively, 93% of the studies used supervised learning, revealing an underuse of unsupervised learning, and indicating an important area for future exploration on discovering hidden patterns and insights without predefined labels or outcomes. In addition, there was a preference for conducting studies in clinical settings (77%), rather than in real-life scenarios, a choice that, along with the underapplication of the full potential of wearable IMUs, is recognized as a limitation in terms of practical applicability. Furthermore, the focus of 65% of the studies on neurological issues suggests an opportunity to broaden research scope to other clinical areas such as musculoskeletal applications, where AI could have significant impacts. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the review calls for a collaborative effort to address the highlighted challenges, including improvements in data collection, increasing dataset sizes, a move that inherently pushes the field toward the adoption of more complex deep learning models, and the expansion of the application of AI models on IMU data methodologies across various medical fields. This approach aims to enhance the reliability, generalizability, and clinical applicability of research findings, ultimately improving patient outcomes and advancing medical research.
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 | 0,019 | 0,110 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,008 | 0,011 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,010 | 0,011 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 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 ».