MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012875769 · doi:10.2196/18092

Smart Shirts for Monitoring Physiological Parameters: Scoping Review

2020· article· en· W3012875769 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hamzeh Khundaqji, Wayne Hing, James Furness, Mike Climstein

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScopusMEDLINEWeb of scienceHealth careMedicinePsychologyMedical emergencyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The recent trends of technological innovation and widescale digitization as potential solutions to challenges in health care, sports, and emergency service operations have led to the conception of smart textile technology. In health care, these smart textile systems present the potential to aid preventative medicine and early diagnosis through continuous, noninvasive tracking of physical and mental health while promoting proactive involvement of patients in their medical management. In areas such as sports and emergency response, the potential to provide comprehensive and simultaneous physiological insights across multiple body systems is promising. However, it is currently unclear what type of evidence exists surrounding the use of smart textiles for the monitoring of physiological outcome measures across different settings. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aimed to systematically survey the existing body of scientific literature surrounding smart textiles in their most prevalent form, the smart shirt, for monitoring physiological outcome measures. METHODS: A total of 5 electronic bibliographic databases were systematically searched (Ovid Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Excerpta Medica database, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and SPORTDiscus). Publications from the inception of the database to June 24, 2019 were reviewed. Nonindexed literature relevant to this review was also systematically searched. The results were then collated, summarized, and reported. RESULTS: Following the removal of duplicates, 7871 citations were identified. On the basis of title and abstract screening, 7632 citations were excluded, whereas 239 were retrieved and assessed for eligibility. Of these, 101 citations were included in the final analysis. Included studies were categorized into four themes: (1) prototype design, (2) validation, (3) observational, and (4) reviews. Among the 101 analyzed studies, prototype design was the most prevalent theme (50/101, 49.5%), followed by validation (29/101, 28.7%), observational studies (21/101, 20.8%), and reviews (1/101, 0.1%). Presented prototype designs ranged from those capable of monitoring one physiological metric to those capable of monitoring several simultaneously. In 29 validation studies, 16 distinct smart shirts were validated against reference technology under various conditions and work rates, including rest, submaximal exercise, and maximal exercise. The identified observational studies used smart shirts in clinical, healthy, and occupational populations for aims such as early diagnosis and stress detection. One scoping review was identified, investigating the use of smart shirts for electrocardiograph signal monitoring in cardiac patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although smart shirts have been found to be valid and reliable in the monitoring of specific physiological metrics, results were variable for others, demonstrating the need for further systematic validation. Analysis of the results has also demonstrated gaps in knowledge, such as a considerable lag of validation and observational studies in comparison with prototype design and limited investigation using smart shirts in pediatric, elite sports, and emergency service populations.

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)0.000
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.225
Threshold uncertainty score0.580

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations63
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting MaterialsFrench-language works237,207