Upper extremity post-stroke motion quality estimation with decision trees and bagging forests
Abstract
Stroke is one of the leading causes of long-term disability. Approximately two thirds of stroke survivors require long-term rehabilitation, which suggests the importance of understanding movement quality in real-world settings. To address this need, we have developed an approach that quantifies physical activity and also evaluates performance quality. Accelerometer and gyroscope sensor data are used to measure upper extremity movements and to develop a mathematical framework to relate objective sensor data to clinical performance metrics. In this article we employ two approaches to extract clinically meaningful quality measures from individuals post-stroke; we then compare the resulting predictive ability of the two approaches. Our findings indicate that Bootstrap Aggregating forest approaches may be superior to the computationally simpler decision trees for unstable data sets including those derived from individuals post-stroke.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
FMA variants are the most commonly used batteries of tests among the included works.
“FMA variants are the most commonly used batteries of tests from the included works [68,69,73]”
From Wearable sensors and machine learning in post-stroke rehabilitation assessment: A systematic review (2022) · cites this paper as [69]
Designing efficient ML-based assessment systems that generalise to new users requires a large number of participants with different and variant degrees of severity.
“In addition, in order to design efficient ML-based assessment systems that generalises to new users a large number of participants should take part with different and variant degrees of severity [43,48,49,69,70], which is not always available and taken into account.”
From Wearable sensors and machine learning in post-stroke rehabilitation assessment: A systematic review (2022) · cites this paper as [69]
Cites
Noorkõiv, M., Rodgers, H., & Price, C. I. (2014) · Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1186/1743-0003-11-144 · Cited by 141 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Wearable sensors and machine learning in post-stroke rehabilitation assessment: A systematic review
Boukhennoufa, I., Zhai, X., Utti, V., Jackson, J., & McDonald-Maier, K. D. (2022) · Biomedical Signal Processing and Control · doi:10.1016/j.bspc.2021.103197 · Cited by 180 · see citing works
“where RSS is the sum of squares of residuals and TSS is the total sum of squares Moreover, another metric used in regression problems and especially in the clinical emulation assessment [53,67,69,71] is the Root Mean Square Error(RMSE) it is defined to be the standard deviation of the residuals (prediction errors):”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialLee, S. I., Adans-Dester, C. P., Grimaldi, M., Dowling, A. V., Horak, P. C., Black-Schaffer, R. M., Bonato, P., & Gwin, J. T. (2018) · IEEE Journal of Translational Engineering in Health and Medicine · doi:10.1109/jtehm.2018.2829208 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
Oubre, B., Daneault, J.-F., Jung, H.-T., Whritenour, K., Miranda, J. G. V., Park, J., Ryu, T., Kim, Y., & Lee, S. I. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering · doi:10.1109/tnsre.2020.2966950 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
- Authors
- Chaeibakhsh, S., Phillips, E., Buchanan, A., & Wade, E.
- Affiliations
- University of Tennessee at Knoxville (US)
- University of Tennessee Medical Center (US)
- ORCID
- Wade, Eric
- Venue
- 2016 38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2016-08
- Volume
- 2016
- Pages
- 4585-4588
- ISSN
- 2375-7477 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2534007666
- Cited by
- 9
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 1.62
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
- Keywords
- stroke, upper limb movement, physical activity measurement, decision tree, stroke rehabilitation
- MeSH terms
- Stroke Rehabilitation, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Algorithms, Biomechanical Phenomena, Decision Trees, Demography, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Motion, Movement, Stroke, Upper Extremity
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