The Emergence of AI-Based Wearable Sensors for Digital Health Technology: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Disease diagnosis and monitoring using conventional healthcare services is typically expensive and has limited accuracy. Wearable health technology based on flexible electronics has gained tremendous attention in recent years for monitoring patient health owing to attractive features, such as lower medical costs, quick access to patient health data, ability to operate and transmit data in harsh environments, storage at room temperature, non-invasive implementation, mass scaling, etc. This technology provides an opportunity for disease pre-diagnosis and immediate therapy. Wearable sensors have opened a new area of personalized health monitoring by accurately measuring physical states and biochemical signals. Despite the progress to date in the development of wearable sensors, there are still several limitations in the accuracy of the data collected, precise disease diagnosis, and early treatment. This necessitates advances in applied materials and structures and using artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled wearable sensors to extract target signals for accurate clinical decision-making and efficient medical care. In this paper, we review two significant aspects of smart wearable sensors. First, we offer an overview of the most recent progress in improving wearable sensor performance for physical, chemical, and biosensors, focusing on materials, structural configurations, and transduction mechanisms. Next, we review the use of AI technology in combination with wearable technology for big data processing, self-learning, power-efficiency, real-time data acquisition and processing, and personalized health for an intelligent sensing platform. Finally, we present the challenges and future opportunities associated with smart wearable sensors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".