Survey-based identification of design requirements and constraints for a wearable tremor suppression device
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Parkinsonian tremor has severely impacted the lives of 65% of individuals with Parkinson's disease, and nearly 25% do not respond to traditional treatments. Although wearable tremor suppression devices (WTSDs) have become a promising alternative approach, this technology is still in the early stages of development, and no studies have reported the stakeholders' opinions on this technology and their desired design requirements. Methods: An online survey was distributed to affected Canadians and Canadian movement disorder specialists (MDS) to acquire information on demographics, the current state of treatments, opinions on the WTSDs, and the desired design requirements of future WTSDs. Results: A total of 101 affected individuals and 24 MDS completed the survey. It was found that both groups are generally open to using WTSDs to manage tremor. The most important design requirement to end users is the adaptability to lifestyle, followed by weight and size, accurate motion, comfort, safety, quick response, and cost. Lastly, most of the participants (65%) think that the device should cost under $500. Conclusions: The findings from this study can be used as guidelines for the development of future WTSDs, such that the future generations could be evaluated and accepted by the end users.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".