Cited by 460Non-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringTime Series Analysis and ForecastingContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 108 of the 108 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 163 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Data Mining for Wearable Sensors in Health Monitoring Systems: A Review of Recent Trends and Challenges

Open access

Abstract

The past few years have witnessed an increase in the development of wearable sensors for health monitoring systems. This increase has been due to several factors such as development in sensor technology as well as directed efforts on political and stakeholder levels to promote projects which address the need for providing new methods for care given increasing challenges with an aging population. An important aspect of study in such system is how the data is treated and processed. This paper provides a recent review of the latest methods and algorithms used to analyze data from wearable sensors used for physiological monitoring of vital signs in healthcare services. In particular, the paper outlines the more common data mining tasks that have been applied such as anomaly detection, prediction and decision making when considering in particular continuous time series measurements. Moreover, the paper further details the suitability of particular data mining and machine learning methods used to process the physiological data and provides an overview of the properties of the data sets used in experimental validation. Finally, based on this literature review, a number of key challenges have been outlined for data mining methods in health monitoring systems.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This review surveys data mining and machine learning methods applied to wearable sensor data for health monitoring, focusing on vital-sign time series. It identifies anomaly detection, prediction, and diagnosis/decision making as the predominant tasks and outlines key challenges for real-world deployment.

Key findings

  • Based on a review of more than eighty papers from the last four years, three data mining tasks predominate: anomaly detection, prediction, and diagnosis/decision making.
  • ECG is predominantly used across all tasks; ECG, HR, SpO2, and RR are described as the most complex health parameters where several data mining techniques have been applied.
  • SVM, neural networks, decision trees, and frequency/wavelet methods are commonly used for wearable sensor data processing, though they have been seen more often only on ECG.
  • The paper reports that decision trees have been used for heat stress risk prediction with 95% accuracy, and that GMM provided the highest accuracy in one coronary artery disease detection study.

Methods

  • Design: literature review of data mining and pattern recognition methods for wearable sensors in health monitoring systems.
  • Data/sample: papers filtered to the last four years, limited to more than eighty selected papers; scope covered vital signs ECG, SpO2, HR, PPG, BG, RR, and BP, while accelerometer-based activity monitoring, gait research, and rehabilitation were excluded.
  • Analysis: literature organized by data mining tasks, algorithms, and data set properties such as time horizon, scale, labeling, continuous/discrete, and single/multi-sensor data.

Limitations

  • Stated field challenges include need for large-scale monitoring in non-clinical contexts, dealing with annotated data sets, exploiting multiple measurements, using contextual information, reliability/trust in automated systems, discovering unseen features, and post-processing/representation.
  • Evident from the review’s scope: the survey is limited to selected vital-sign parameters and excludes activity monitoring via accelerometers; it covers only the last four years and more than eighty papers, so it is not a systematic review of all available literature.
  • The paper states that there is no tailored work considering preprocessing issues such as data formatting, normalization, and synchronization in detail for real-life scenarios.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/s131217472

Cites

108 of 108 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 163 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 55 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 50
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 110
138 of 138
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The selected set of more than eighty papers is representative of recent research in data mining for wearable health monitoring.

    “So, the selected papers as the representatives of the performed research are limited to the more than eighty papers.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    GMM assumes that the input data are a linear combination of Gaussian distributions.

    “This method is based on this assumption that the input data are a linear combination of Gaussian distributions.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The basic task of healthcare monitoring is to find the obvious problem in physiological data.

    “Due to the basic task of the healthcare monitoring which is to find the obvious problem in physiological data, the RBR phase is necessary to apply on any wearable sensor framework [82].”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Having a robust data processing stage requires adequate information about the data itself.

    “In any health monitoring system, having a robust data processing stage requires adequate information about the data itself.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Dealing with the type of input data and its properties is the prerequisite of any data processing system.

    “In other words, dealing with the type of input data and its properties is the prerequisite of any data processing system in order to handle the significant issues such as: selecting the proper data mining approach, designing and adjusting new method and features, and tuning the parameters of data analysis.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Health monitoring systems need to evaluate their results in order to show the correctness of the decision making process.

    “Health monitoring systems need to evaluate their results in order to show the correctness of the decision making process.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The literature study performed here is sufficient to identify general challenges in the field of health monitoring.

    “These challenges are general challenges in the field of health monitoring and have emerged from the literature study performed here.”
7 of 7

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Method attributed to [57] changes from Gaussian process to GMM

    Minor

    The preprocessing discussion attributes a Gaussian process for secure authentication to [57], while the description of the same work says it uses a Gaussian mixture model (GMM).

  • Reference [73] does not match the claimed neural-network source

    Minor

    The neural-network section cites [73] for replicator neural networks, but reference [73] is about the value of self-monitored blood glucose testing.

  • Reference [16] does not match the claimed arrhythmia-detection study

    Minor

    The text attributes an ECG arrhythmia-detection method to [16], but the paper's entry for [16] identifies it as a review of wearable sensors for rehabilitation.

  • Study [44] is described as using both unlabeled and expert-labeled data

    Minor

    The data-properties section lists [44] among studies of unlabeled data, whereas the description of [44] says its data episodes have expert-assigned severity labels.

4 of 4

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 107 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 460

Metadata

Authors
Banaee, H., Ahmed, M., & Loutfi, A.
Affiliations
Örebro University (SE)
Corresponding author
Banaee, Hadi
Venue
Sensors
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2013-12-17
Volume
13
Issue
12
Pages
17472-17500
ISSN
1424-8220 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2146884567
Cited by
452
References
107
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 42 · 2019: 49 · 2018: 49 · 2017: 48 · 2016: 48 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 8
FWCI
2.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sensors (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Örebro University Library (Örebro University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Time Series Analysis and Forecasting
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Keywords
wearable sensors, health monitoring system, physiological monitoring, vital signs, data mining, anomaly detection, time series forecasting, decision-making, continuous time series, machine learning, population aging
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Artificial Intelligence, Humans, Monitoring, Physiologic, Biosensing Techniques, Monitoring, Ambulatory, Data Mining

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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