MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380364791 · doi:10.1115/dmd2023-8625

DESIGN, IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION OF A SMART TOOTHBRUSH FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DEMENTIA

2023· article· en· W4380364791 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Jannati, Sarah K O’Byrne, Zahra Moussavi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Research and COVID-19
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaToothbrushBluetoothSoftwareComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionPsychologyMultimediaDiseaseWirelessMedicineEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Dementia in general and Alzheimer’s Disease in particular, is one of the most challenging health conditions in our century. Experiencing cognitive decline, resulting in relying on others for daily living activities and impairment in basic mental tasks are the main symptoms. There are yet no proven treatments to slow or prevent neurodegenerative dementia progression; thus, dementia patients eventually need full-time care. To help patients to stay in their own homes longer and ease the caregiver burden, Smart Assistive Technology (SAT) products may be beneficial. One of the basic activities that Alzheimer’s patients in particular need help with, are basic hygiene needs such as brushing their teeth. A smart toothbrush has been designed and implemented as a pilot study towards development of a SAT for basic hygiene functions of dementia patients, while it can also have educational application for children. The design includes hardware and software. The hardware includes 9-Axis motion sensor, individually addressable light-emitting diodes (LEDs), Bluetooth Light Energy (BLE) communication module, laser distance sensor and other electrical components. The software includes real-time monitoring of several dependent and independent tasks using an algorithm to assist the users and transmit that data to a smartphone application. The real-time monitoring system of the designed prototype assists the users by visual and auditory means. It is anticipated the designed prototype will assist people with dementia, and hopefully prolong the time they can be cared for at home; it may also be used for oral hygiene education and instruction in general.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDental Research and COVID-19French-language works237,207