Towards Reliable, Automated General Movement Assessment for Perinatal Stroke Screening in Infants Using Wearable Accelerometers
Open accessAbstract
Perinatal stroke (PS) is a serious condition that, if undetected and thus untreated, often leads to life-long disability, in particular Cerebral Palsy (CP). In clinical settings, Prechtl's General Movement Assessment (GMA) can be used to classify infant movements using a Gestalt approach, identifying infants at high risk of developing PS. Training and maintenance of assessment skills are essential and expensive for the correct use of GMA, yet many practitioners lack these skills, preventing larger-scale screening and leading to significant risks of missing opportunities for early detection and intervention for affected infants. We present an automated approach to GMA, based on body-worn accelerometers and a novel sensor data analysis method--Discriminative Pattern Discovery (DPD)--that is designed to cope with scenarios where only coarse annotations of data are available for model training. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach in a study with 34 newborns (21 typically developing infants and 13 PS infants with abnormal movements). Our method is able to correctly recognise the trials with abnormal movements with at least the accuracy that is required by newly trained human annotators (75%), which is encouraging towards our ultimate goal of an automated PS screening system that can be used population-wide.
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?
Other works have introduced methods for monitoring stroke in infants using wearable accelerometers and methods for assessing depressive symptoms utilizing wrist-worn sensors.
“Other works have introduced methods for monitoring stroke in infants using wearable accelerometers [41] and methods for assessing depressive symptoms utilizing wrist-worn sensors [42].”
From Deep Learning in Human Activity Recognition with Wearable Sensors: A Review on Advances (2022) · cites this paper as [41]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 48 · Cited by 49
- Authors
- Gao, Y., Long, Y., Guan, Y., Basu, A., Baggaley, J., & Ploetz, T.
- Affiliations
- Newcastle University (GB)
- Great North Children's Hospital (GB)
- School of Interactive Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, USA
- Venue
- Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
- Published
- 2019-03-29
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-22
- ISSN
- 2474-9567 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2918079264
- Cited by
- 49
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 2.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies (publishedVersion)
- Durham Research Online (Durham University) (acceptedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- Durham Research Online (Durham University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- National Institute for Health Research (CDF-2013-06-001)
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/M023001/1)
- Medical Research Council (MR/S003916/1)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Neonatal and fetal brain pathology
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
- Keywords
- perinatal stroke, wearable accelerometers, cerebral palsy, stroke screening, neonates, early detection
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