MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303444312 · doi:10.1080/17483107.2022.2129851

Perspectives and expectations of stroke survivors using egocentric cameras for monitoring hand function at home: a mixed methods study

2022· article· en· W4303444312 on OpenAlexafffund
Meng-Fen Tsai, Sharmini Atputharaj, José Zariffa, Rosalie H. Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation Assistive Technology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsActivities of daily livingRehabilitationUsabilityStroke (engine)PsychologyWearable computerPhysical medicine and rehabilitationDescriptive statisticsOccupational therapyApplied psychologyPhysical therapyMedicineComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Most stroke survivors have remaining upper limb impairment six months after stroke and require additional rehabilitation and help from family members to enhance their performance of daily activities. First-person (egocentric) video has been proposed to capture the activities of daily living (ADLs) of stroke survivors in order to assess their hand function at home. This study explored the experiences and expectations of stroke survivors regarding the use of egocentric cameras in daily life for rehabilitation applications. METHODS: Twenty-one chronic stroke survivors recruited for the study were asked to record three sessions of 1.5 h of video of their ADLs at home over two weeks. Their experiences and expectations after completing the recordings were discussed using a structured questionnaire and a semi-structured interview. The questionnaire and interview data were analysed using descriptive statistics and content analysis, respectively. The results were further integrated using a mixed methods analysis for mutual explanation and elaboration. RESULTS: . The participants perceived that the camera was easy to use, the information obtained from the recordings was beneficial, and no major concerns about recording at home. A discreet camera and a solution to privacy issues were prerequisites to recording tasks in public. CONCLUSIONS: There was high acceptance among stroke survivors regarding the use of wearable cameras for rehabilitation purposes in the future. Concerns to be managed include discomfort, self-consciousness, and the privacy of others.Implications for rehabilitationThe egocentric camera was easy for the stroke survivors to use at home. However, they expressed a preference for cameras to be less noticeable and lighter in the future to minimize self-consciousness and discomfort.Expectations for future use of an egocentric camera for upper limb rehabilitation at home from the perspectives of stroke survivors included receiving feedback on their hand function in daily life and guidance on how to improve function.Privacy concerns of stroke survivors regarding recording activities of daily living were mostly avoidable by planning in advance. However, some personal hygiene tasks and virtual meetings were recorded by accident. A checklist of common activities that may raise privacy issues can be provided along with the camera to serve as a reminder to avoid these issues.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.296
Threshold uncertainty score0.709

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisability and Rehabilitation Assistive TechnologySame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207