MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004591359 · doi:10.2196/16354

Assisting Home-Based Resistance Training for Normotensive and Prehypertensive Individuals Using Ambient Lighting and Sonification Feedback: Sensor-Based System Evaluation

2020· article· en· W3004591359 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mustafa Radha, Niels den Boer, Martijn C. Willemsen, Thom Paardekooper, Wijnand A. IJsselsteijn, Francesco Sartor

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Cardio · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceived exertionPhysical therapyRating of perceived exertionPsychologySonificationCompetence (human resources)ConcentricPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineBlood pressureHeart rateSocial psychologyMathematicsStatisticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Physical exercise is an effective lifestyle intervention to improve blood pressure. Although aerobic sports can be performed anywhere, resistance exercises are traditionally performed at the gym; extending the latter to the home setting may promote an increase in the number of practitioners. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate a sensor-based system that guides resistance exercises through ambient lighting and sonification (A/S) feedback in a home setting in 34 study participants who were normotensive and prehypertensive. METHODS: Participants took part in a 1.5-hour exercise session in which they experienced the A/S feedback (ie, experimental condition) as well as a control condition (ie, no feedback) and a reference condition (ie, verbal feedback through a human remote coach). The system was evaluated for improving exercise form (range of motion, timing, and breathing patterns) as well as psychophysiological experience (perceived exertion, attentional focus, competence, and motivation). RESULTS: A/S feedback was significantly better than the control for concentric (mean 2.48, SD 0.75 seconds; P<.001) and eccentric (mean 2.92, SD 1.05 seconds; P<.001) contraction times, concentric range of motion consistency (mean 15.64, SD 8.31 cm vs mean 17.94, SD 9.75 cm; P<.001), and perceived exertion (mean 3.37, SD 0.78 vs mean 3.64, SD 0.76; P<.001). However, A/S feedback did not outperform verbal feedback on any of these measures. The breathing technique was best in the control condition (ie, without any feedback). Participants did not show more positive changes in perceived competence with A/S feedback or verbal feedback. CONCLUSIONS: The system seemed to improve resistance exercise execution and perception in comparison with the control, but did not outperform a human tele-coach. Further research is warranted to improve the breathing technique.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR CardioSame topicTactile and Sensory InteractionsFrench-language works237,207