Current State of Connected Sensor Technologies Used During Rehabilitation Care: Protocol for a Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Connected sensor technologies can capture raw data and analyze them using advanced statistical methods such as machine learning or artificial intelligence to generate interpretable behavioral or physiological outcomes. Previous research conducted on connected sensor technologies has focused on design, development, and validation. Published review studies have either summarized general technological solutions to address specific behaviors such as physical activity or focused on remote monitoring solutions in specific patient populations. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to map research that focused on using connected sensor technologies to augment rehabilitation services by informing care decisions. METHODS: The Population, Concept, and Context framework will be used to define inclusion criteria. Relevant articles published between 2008 to the present will be included if (1) the study enrolled adults (population), (2) the intervention used at least one connected sensor technology and involved data transfer to a clinician so that the data could be used to inform the intervention (concept), and (3) the intervention was within the scope of rehabilitation (context). An initial search strategy will be built in Embase; peer reviewed; and then translated to Ovid MEDLINE ALL, Web of Science Core Collection, and CINAHL. Duplicates will be removed prior to screening articles for inclusion. Two independent reviewers will screen articles in 2 stages: title/abstract and full text. Discrepancies will be resolved through group discussion. Data from eligible articles relevant to population, concept, and context will be extracted. Descriptive statistics will be used to report findings, and relevant outcomes will include the type and frequency of connected sensor used and method of data sharing. Additional details will be narratively summarized and displayed in tables and figures. Key partners will review results to enhance interpretation and trustworthiness. RESULTS: We conducted initial searches to refine the search strategy in February 2024. The results of this scoping review are expected in October 2024. CONCLUSIONS: Results from the scoping review will identify critical areas of inquiry to advance the field of technology-augmented rehabilitation. Results will also support the development of a longitudinal model to support long-term health outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework jys53; https://osf.io/jys53. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/60496.
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 | 0.067 | 0.076 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.021 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.064 | 0.011 |
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".