The deployment of wearable or body-worn devices is increasing rapidly, and thus researchers’ interests mainly include technical and economical issues, such as networking, interoperability, security, power optimization, business growth and regulation. To address these issues properly, previous survey papers usually focused on describing the wireless body area network architecture and network protocols. This implies that deployment issues and awareness issues of wearable and BAN devices are not emphasized in previous work. To defeat this problem, in this study, we have focused on feasibility, limitations, and security concerns in wireless body area networks. In the aspect of the economy, we have focused on the compound annual growth rate of these devices in the global market, different regulations of wearable/wireless body area network devices in different regions and countries of the world and feasible research projects for wireless body area networks. In addition, this study focuses on the domain of devices that are equally important to physicians, sportsmen, trainers and coaches, computer scientists, engineers, and investors. The outcomes of this study relating to physicians, fitness trainers and coaches indicate that the use of these devices means they would be able to treat their clients in a more effective way. The study also converges the focus of businessmen on the Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) and provides manufacturers and vendors with information about different regulatory bodies that are monitoring and regulating WBAN devices. Therefore, by providing deployment issues in the aspects of technology and economy at the same time, we believe that this survey can serve as a preliminary material that will lead to more advancements and improvements in deployment in the area of wearable wireless body area networks. Finally, we present open issues and further research direction in the area of wireless body area networks.
Purpose
– Quality function deployment (QFD) is a methodology to translate the “voice of the customer” into engineering/technical specifications (HOWs) to be followed in designing of products or services. For the method to be effective, QFD practitioners need to be able to accurately differentiate between the final weights (FWs) that have been assigned to HOWs in the house of quality matrix. The paper aims to introduce a statistical testing procedure to determine whether the FWs of HOWs are significantly different and investigate the robustness of different rating scales used in QFD practice in contributing to these differences.
Design/methodology/approach
– Using a range of published QFD examples, the paper uses a parametric bootstrap testing procedure to test the significance of the differences between the FWs by generating simulated random samples based on a theoretical probability model. The paper then determines the significance or otherwise of the differences between: the two most extreme FWs and all pairs of FWs. Finally, the paper checks the robustness of different attribute rating scales (linear vs non-linear) in the context of these testing procedures.
Findings
– The paper demonstrates that not all of the differences that exist between the FWs of HOW attributes are in fact significant. In the absence of such a procedure, there is no reliable analytical basis for QFD practitioners to determine whether FWs are significantly different, and they may wrongly prioritise one engineering attribute over another.
Originality/value
– This is the first article to test the significance of the differences between FWs of HOWs and to determine the robustness of different strength of scales used in relationship matrix.
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.