Comparing metrological properties of pressure-sensitive mats for continuous patient monitoring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pressure-sensitive mat (PSM) technology offers several advantages as a sensor modality for patient monitoring since it is non-contact and unobtrusive. However, as we move to deploy PSM for long-term continuous patient monitoring, we must consider and characterize their metrological properties that arise due to their electrical, mechanical or optical construction. We evaluate the dynamic metrological properties of rise time, creep, percent change in creep, drift, and repeatability for three different PSM technologies from three vendors, namely, S4 (Kinotex fiber-optics), Tekscan (resistive ink), and XSensor (capacitive). Both long-term (14.5 hrs) and repeated short-term experiments (1 min) were conducted using two anthropometric models exhibiting contact pressures representative of adult and neonatal patients. Long-term experiments were conducted to characterize rise time, creep, percent change in creep, and drift for each sensor. With both pressure models, the XSensor exhibited the fastest dynamic response in terms of rise and recovery times, while Tekscan exhibited the slowest responses. S4 and Tekscan present with an expected decrease in drift with application of the adult model, but XSensor shows the opposite trend. Short-term experiments were conducted to measure repeatability with four application-removal repetitions for 1 min each. The coefficient of variation (CoV) was computed for each sensor as a measure of repeatability. For both pressure models, the smaller CoV of XSensor implies greater repeatability and hence, greater reliability.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".