MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156366785 · doi:10.1109/wimob.2007.4390867

A Proof of Concept for a Wireless Ambulatory Weight Bearing Measurement System in Rehabilitation and Telerehabilitation Applications

2007· article· en· W2156366785 on OpenAlexaff
A Authier, Patrick Boissy, Jacques Beauvais, Rojean Fontaine

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStandard deviationCenter of pressure (fluid mechanics)AnkleContext (archaeology)Computer scienceGaitSimulationForce platformAccelerometerHeelGround reaction forceMathematicsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineEngineeringKinematicsStatisticsStructural engineeringSurgeryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Weight bearing is an important clinical variable for rehabilitation specialists. The objectives of this proof of concept study were to design and build a wireless system for weight bearing measurement that would provide accurate dynamic and static measurements of plantar forces from multiple sites. The proposed system consists of two shoes instrumented with miniature load cells connected to ankle modules for wireless communication to a computer and signal conditioning. Force plates were used as the gold standard to evaluate the accuracy of the proposed system during quiet standing, walking and weight-shifting tasks in 30 young subjects. The performance of the system was characterized for each task using the following variables: percentage of body weight (PBW), heel-strike (HS) peak force value, stance time (ST), double support time (DST), excursion of center of pressure (COP) in the anteroposterior axis (ACOPx). For the measurement of the PBW, the standard deviation of errors in comparison to data obtained from forces plates during quiet-standing and weight-shifting activities was between 3.96% and 5.13%. With respect to gait parameters, the standard deviation of errors for the measurement of the peak forces during walking was between 6.10% and 8.82% for both shoes, and errors on timing variables during gait cycles were small (less than 18 msec for one standard deviation). For the ACOPx during a front weight-shifting trial, the standard deviation of errors was 19.20% for the right foot. The accuracy of the proposed system offers acceptable performances in the context of its proposed clinical applications. The envisioned embodiment and use of the system are instrumented shoes individually calibrated to assess in combination with real time video from videoconferencing codecs weight bearing capabilities in the context of telerehabilitation care. Work on the integration of the system with a clinical system for telerehabilitation is on-going.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDiabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207