IntroductionHuman body acceleration is often used as an indicator of daily physical activity in epidemiological research. Raw acceleration signals contain three basic components: movement, gravity, and noise. Separation of these becomes increasingly difficult during rotational movements. We aimed to evaluate five different methods (metrics) of processing acceleration signals on their ability to remove the gravitational component of acceleration during standardised mechanical movements and the implications for human daily physical activity assessment.MethodsAn industrial robot rotated accelerometers in the vertical plane. Radius, frequency, and angular range of motion were systematically varied. Three metrics (Euclidian norm minus one [ENMO], Euclidian norm of the high-pass filtered signals [HFEN], and HFEN plus Euclidean norm of low-pass filtered signals minus 1 g [HFEN+]) were derived for each experimental condition and compared against the reference acceleration (forward kinematics) of the robot arm. We then compared metrics derived from human acceleration signals from the wrist and hip in 97 adults (22–65 yr), and wrist in 63 women (20–35 yr) in whom daily activity-related energy expenditure (PAEE) was available.ResultsIn the robot experiment, HFEN+ had lowest error during (vertical plane) rotations at an oscillating frequency higher than the filter cut-off frequency while for lower frequencies ENMO performed better. In the human experiments, metrics HFEN and ENMO on hip were most discrepant (within- and between-individual explained variance of 0.90 and 0.46, respectively). ENMO, HFEN and HFEN+ explained 34%, 30% and 36% of the variance in daily PAEE, respectively, compared to 26% for a metric which did not attempt to remove the gravitational component (metric EN).ConclusionIn conclusion, none of the metrics as evaluated systematically outperformed all other metrics across a wide range of standardised kinematic conditions. However, choice of metric explains different degrees of variance in daily human physical activity.
Breast cancer is the most common type of cancer among women in the western world. While mammography is regarded as the most effective tool for the detection and diagnosis of breast cancer, the interpretation of mammograms is a difficult and error-prone task. Hence, computer aids have been developed that assist the radiologist in the interpretation of mammograms. Computer-aided detection (CADe) systems address the problem that radiologists often miss signs of cancers that are retrospectively visible in mammograms. Furthermore, computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) systems have been proposed that assist the radiologist in the classification of mammographic lesions as benign or malignant. While a broad variety of approaches to both CADe and CADx systems have been published in the past two decades, an extensive survey of the state of the art is only available for CADe approaches. Therefore, a comprehensive review of the state of the art of CADx approaches is presented in this work. Besides providing a summary, the goals for this article are to identify relations, contradictions, and gaps in literature, and to suggest directions for future research. Because of the vast amount of publications on the topic, this survey is restricted to the two most important types of mammographic lesions: masses and clustered microcalcifications. Furthermore, it focuses on articles published in international journals.
BackgroundReduced muscular strength in the old age is strongly related to activity impairment and mortality. However, studies evaluating the gender-specific association between muscularity and mortality among older adults are lacking. Thus, the objective of the present study was to examine gender differences in the association between muscular strength and mortality in a prospective population-based cohort study.MethodsData used in this study derived from the Cooperative Health Research in the Region of Augsburg (KORA)-Age Study. The present analysis includes 1,066 individuals (mean age 76 ± 11 SD years) followed up over 3 years. Handgrip strength was measured using the Jamar Dynamometer. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to determine adjusted hazard ratios of mortality with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for handgrip strength. Potential confounders (i.e. age, nutritional status, number of prescribed drugs, diseases and level of physical activity) were pre-selected according to evidence-based information.ResultsDuring the follow-up period, 56 men (11%) and 39 women (7%) died. Age-adjusted mortality rates per 1,000 person years (95% CI) were 77 (59–106), 24 (13–41) and 14 (7–30) for men and 57 (39–81), 14 (7–27) and 1 (0–19) for women for the first, second and third sex-specific tertile of muscular strength, respectively. Low handgrip strength was significantly associated with all-cause mortality among older men and women from the general population after controlling for significant confounders. Hazard ratios (95% CI) comparing the first and second tertile to the third tertle were 3.33 (1.53–7.22) and 1.42 (0.61-3.28), respectively. Respective hazard ratios (95% CI) for mortality were higher in women than in men ((5.23 (0.67–40.91) and 2.17 (0.27–17.68) versus 2.36 (0.97–5.75) and 0.97 (0.36–2.57)).ConclusionsGrip strength is inversely associated with mortality risk in older adults, and this association is independent of age, nutritional status, number of prescribed drugs, number of chronic diseases and level of physical activity. The association between muscular strength and all-cause mortality tended to be stronger in women. It seems to be particularly important for the weakest to enhance their levels of muscular strength in order to reduce the risk of dying early.
BackgroundOver the last two decades, the number of studies on electronic symptom reporting has increased greatly. However, the field is very heterogeneous: the choices of patient groups, health service innovations, and research targets seem to involve a broad range of foci. To move the field forward, it is necessary to build on work that has been done and direct further research to the areas holding most promise. Therefore, we conducted a comprehensive review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on electronic communication between patient and provider to improve health care service quality, presented in two parts. Part 2 investigates the methodological quality and effects of the RCTs, and demonstrates some promising benefits of electronic symptom reporting.ObjectiveTo give a comprehensive overview of the most mature part of this emerging field regarding (1) patient groups, (2) health service innovations, and (3) research targets relevant to electronic symptom reporting.MethodsWe searched Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and IEEE Xplore for original studies presented in English-language articles published from 1990 to November 2011. Inclusion criteria were RCTs of interventions where patients or parents reported health information electronically to the health care system for health care purposes and were given feedback.ResultsOf 642 records identified, we included 32 articles representing 29 studies. The included articles were published from 2002, with 24 published during the last 5 years. The following five patient groups were represented: respiratory and lung diseases (12 studies), cancer (6), psychiatry (6), cardiovascular (3), and diabetes (1). In addition to these, 1 study had a mix of three groups. All included studies, except 1, focused on long-term conditions. We identified four categories of health service innovations: consultation support (7 studies), monitoring with clinician support (12), self-management with clinician support (9), and therapy (1). Most of the research (21/29, 72%) was conducted within four combinations: consultation support innovation in the cancer group (5/29, 17%), monitoring innovation in the respiratory and lung diseases group (8/29, 28%), and self-management innovations in psychiatry (4/29, 14%) and in the respiratory and lung diseases group (4/29, 14%). Research targets in the consultation support studies focused on increased patient centeredness, while monitoring and self-management mainly aimed at documenting health benefits. All except 1 study aiming for reduced health care costs were in the monitoring group.ConclusionRCT-based research on electronic symptom reporting has developed enormously since 2002. Research including additional patient groups or new combinations of patient groups with the four identified health service innovations can be expected in the near future. We suggest that developing a generic model (not diagnosis specific) for electronic patient symptom reporting for long-term conditions may benefit the field.
BackgroundWe conducted in two parts a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on electronic symptom reporting between patients and providers to improve health care service quality. Part 1 reviewed the typology of patient groups, health service innovations, and research targets. Four innovation categories were identified: consultation support, monitoring with clinician support, self-management with clinician support, and therapy.ObjectiveTo assess the methodological quality of the RCTs, and summarize effects and benefits from the methodologically best studies.MethodsWe searched Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and IEEE Xplore for original studies presented in English-language articles between 1990 and November 2011. Risk of bias and feasibility were judged according to the Cochrane recommendation, and theoretical evidence and preclinical testing were evaluated according to the Framework for Design and Evaluation of Complex Interventions to Improve Health. Three authors assessed the risk of bias and two authors extracted the effect data independently. Disagreement regarding bias assessment, extraction, and interpretation of results were resolved by consensus discussions.ResultsOf 642 records identified, we included 32 articles representing 29 studies. No articles fulfilled all quality requirements. All interventions were feasible to implement in a real-life setting, and theoretical evidence was provided for almost all studies. However, preclinical testing was reported in only a third of the articles. We judged three-quarters of the articles to have low risk for random sequence allocation and approximately half of the articles to have low risk for the following biases: allocation concealment, incomplete outcome data, and selective reporting. Slightly more than one fifth of the articles were judged as low risk for blinding of outcome assessment. Only 1 article had low risk of bias for blinding of participants and personnel. We excluded 12 articles showing high risk or unclear risk for both selective reporting and blinding of outcome assessment from the effect assessment. The authors’ hypothesis was confirmed for 13 (65%) of the 20 remaining articles. Articles on self-management support were of higher quality, allowing us to assess effects in a larger proportion of studies. All except one self-management interventions were equally effective to or better than the control option. The self-management articles document substantial benefits for patients, and partly also for health professionals and the health care system.ConclusionElectronic symptom reporting between patients and providers is an exciting area of development for health services. However, the research generally is of low quality. The field would benefit from increased focus on methods for conducting and reporting RCTs. It appears particularly important to improve blinding of outcome assessment and to precisely define primary outcomes to avoid selective reporting. Supporting self-management seems to b...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.