Cited by 6Stroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryContext-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Assessment of Purposeful Movements for Post-Stroke Patients in Activites of Daily Living with Wearable Sensor Device

Butt, Abdul Haleem, Zambrana, Carme, Idelsohn-Zielonka, Sebastian, Claramunt-Molet, Mireia, Ugartemendia-Etxarri, Amaia, Rovini, Erika, Moschetti, Alessandra, Molleja, Carlos, Martin, Cristina, Salleras, Eloy Opisso, Cavallo, Filippo·2019·2019 IEEE Conference on Computational Intelligence in Bioinformatics and Computational Biology (CIBCB)

Abstract

Hemiparesis is one of the most frequent poststroke conditions, which causes muscle weakness and/or inability to move one side of the body. Physical rehabilitation is the main treatment for hemiparesis recovery, and physiotherapists agree that using the impaired arm in the activities of daily living (ADLs)is crucial for a complete recovery. Currently, rehabilitation is assessed through diaries and self-questionnaires, which are subjective and do not tell the real condition of the patients throughout the day. Assistive devices can objectively evaluate the functional improvement of the impaired arm monitoring its activity. This work aimed to identify the purposeful arm movements during patient's ADLs. We consider arm's swing while walking as a non-purposeful movement. Firstly, the event-based approach was applied to separate movement and non-movement segments. Secondly, movement segments were used to detect the change-point (events)and their locations in time series signal. Two machine learning classifiers, Support Vector Machine (SVM)and Artificial Neural Network (ANN), were trained using 10-fold cross validation for the classification of purposeful and non-purposeful movements. Data from 10 healthy and 12 post-strokes volunteers from Institute Guttmann (Barcelona)were collected using the SensHand device. The volunteers, wearing one SensHand on each wrist, performed the following activities: resting, eating, pouring water, drinking, brushing, folding towel, grasp towel, grasp brush, grasp glass, continuous and walking. Developing a model based on the healthy subjects, the overall classification accuracy obtained from SVM classifier and ANN was 81.21 % and 97.06% respectively. Similarly, with poststroke subjects obtained accuracy with the SVM and ANN was 84.18% and 99.74% respectively. Considering the whole dataset, SVM and ANN obtained maximum accuracy equal to 86.21 % and 99.91 % respectively. In conclusion, our work showed promising results for the classification of purposeful and non-purposeful movements.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cibcb.2019.8791470

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 27

  1. 10.1109/TBME.2015.2477095 · DOI
  2. 10.1016/j.smhl.2018.07.027 · DOI
  3. 10.1177/1550147717707417 · DOI
  4. rovini, 2015, Empowering Patients in Self-Management of Parkinson's Disease through Cooperative ICT Systems, 251
  5. 10.1109/JSEN.2014.2357257 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1016/S1474-4422(15)00389-0 · DOI
  7. 10.3390/s16081341 · DOI
  8. 10.1080/01621459.2012.737745 · DOI
  9. zhao, 2018, Ultigesture: A wristband-based platform for continuous gesture control in healthcare, Smart Heal
  10. biomedica, 0, Identification and classification of motor activities using inertial sensors data Benish Fida
  11. 10.3109/03790799009166594 · DOI
  12. 10.1016/j.artmed.2018.06.003 · DOI
  13. 2017, The Burden of stroke in Europe: the challenge for policy makers, King's College London and Stroke Alliance for Europe
  14. 10.1016/j.smhl.2018.07.027 · DOI
  15. 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2015.10.029 · DOI
  16. 10.1177/026921558700100409 · DOI
  17. 10.1161/01.STR.28.10.1871 · DOI
  18. 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61689-4 · DOI · Paper page
  19. 10.1109/EMBC.2012.6347388 · DOI
  20. 10.1161/01.STR.0000054630.33395.E2 · DOI
  21. garcia, 2016, Human activity recognition by inertial signals obtained from a smartphone
  22. 10.1109/ICTer.2012.6421415 · DOI
  23. 10.3390/jsan6040028 · DOI
  24. chih-wei hsu, 2003, A Practical Guide to Support Vector Classification, National Taiwan University
  25. 10.1109/ICRA.2017.7989370 · DOI
  26. 10.1109/TII.2016.2613683 · DOI
  27. 10.1109/JBHI.2019.2891729 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Butt, A. H., Zambrana, C., Idelsohn-Zielonka, S., Claramunt-Molet, M., Ugartemendia-Etxarri, A., Rovini, E., Moschetti, A., Molleja, C., Martin, C., Salleras, E. O., & Cavallo, F.
Affiliations
  • Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna (IT)
  • EURECAT Centre Tecnològic de Catalunya (ES)
  • Institut Guttmann (ES)
Venue
2019 IEEE Conference on Computational Intelligence in Bioinformatics and Computational Biology (CIBCB)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2019-07
Pages
1-8
OpenAlex
W2968717862
Cited by
6
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 2
FWCI
1.54
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Conference on Computational Intelligence in Bioinformatics and Computational Biology (CIBCB) (publishedVersion)
  • Florence Research (University of Florence) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Prosthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Keywords
stroke rehabilitation, hemiparesis, activities of daily living, wearable sensors, change point detection, support vector machine, artificial neural networks

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review