Artificial intelligence-driven virtual rehabilitation for people living in the community: A scoping review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Virtual Rehabilitation (VRehab) is a promising approach to improving the physical and mental functioning of patients living in the community. The use of VRehab technology results in the generation of multi-modal datasets collected through various devices. This presents opportunities for the development of Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques in VRehab, namely the measurement, detection, and prediction of various patients' health outcomes. The objective of this scoping review was to explore the applications and effectiveness of incorporating AI into home-based VRehab programs. PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, IEEE Xplore, Web of Science databases, and Google Scholar were searched from inception until June 2023 for studies that applied AI for the delivery of VRehab programs to the homes of adult patients. After screening 2172 unique titles and abstracts and 51 full-text studies, 13 studies were included in the review. A variety of AI algorithms were applied to analyze data collected from various sensors and make inferences about patients' health outcomes, most involving evaluating patients' exercise quality and providing feedback to patients. The AI algorithms used in the studies were mostly fuzzy rule-based methods, template matching, and deep neural networks. Despite the growing body of literature on the use of AI in VRehab, very few studies have examined its use in patients' homes. Current research suggests that integrating AI with home-based VRehab can lead to improved rehabilitation outcomes for patients. However, further research is required to fully assess the effectiveness of various forms of AI-driven home-based VRehab, taking into account its unique challenges and using standardized metrics.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it