Advancements in Wearable Sensor Technologies for Health Monitoring in Terms of Clinical Applications, Rehabilitation, and Disease Risk Assessment: Systematic Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Wearable sensor technologies such as inertial measurement units, smartwatches, and multisensor systems have emerged as valuable tools in clinical and real-world health monitoring. These devices enable continuous, noninvasive tracking of gait, mobility, and functional health across diverse populations. However, challenges remain in sensor placement standardization, data processing consistency, and real-world validation. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to evaluate recent literature on the clinical and research applications of wearable sensors. Specifically, it investigated how these technologies are used to assess mobility, predict disease risk, and support rehabilitation. It also identified limitations and proposed future research directions. METHODS: This review was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. We searched the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases up to March 9, 2025. Inclusion criteria focused on studies using wearable sensors in clinical or real-world environments. A total of 30 eligible studies were identified for qualitative synthesis. Data extracted included study design, population characteristics, sensor type and placement, machine learning algorithms, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Of the included studies, 43% (13/30) were observational, 27% (8/30) were experimental, and 10% (3/30) were randomized controlled trials. Inertial measurement unit-based sensors were used in 67% (20/30) of the studies, with wrist-worn devices being the most common (13/20, 65%). Machine learning techniques were frequently applied, with random forest (6/30, 20%) and deep learning (5/30, 17%) models predominating. Clinical applications spanned Parkinson disease, stroke, multiple sclerosis, and frailty, with several studies (4/30, 13%) reporting high predictive accuracy for fall risk and mobility decline (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve up to 0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Wearable sensors show strong potential for mobility monitoring, disease risk assessment, and rehabilitation tracking in clinical and real-world settings. However, challenges remain in standardizing sensor protocols and data analysis. Future research should focus on large-scale, longitudinal studies; harmonized machine learning pipelines; and integration with cloud-based health systems to improve scalability and clinical translation.
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 | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| 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 ».