Performance and Characteristics of Wearable Sensor Systems Discriminating and Classifying Older Adults According to Fall Risk: A Systematic Review

Sensor-based fall risk assessment (SFRA) utilizes wearable sensors for monitoring individuals’ motions in fall risk assessment tasks. Previous SFRA reviews recommend methodological improvements to better support the use of SFRA in clinical practice. This systematic review aimed to investigate the ex...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Annica Kristoffersson, Jiaying Du, Maria Ehn
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2021-08-01
Series:Sensors
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/21/17/5863
_version_ 1797520794174095360
author Annica Kristoffersson
Jiaying Du
Maria Ehn
author_facet Annica Kristoffersson
Jiaying Du
Maria Ehn
author_sort Annica Kristoffersson
collection DOAJ
description Sensor-based fall risk assessment (SFRA) utilizes wearable sensors for monitoring individuals’ motions in fall risk assessment tasks. Previous SFRA reviews recommend methodological improvements to better support the use of SFRA in clinical practice. This systematic review aimed to investigate the existing evidence of SFRA (discriminative capability, classification performance) and methodological factors (study design, samples, sensor features, and model validation) contributing to the risk of bias. The review was conducted according to recommended guidelines and 33 of 389 screened records were eligible for inclusion. Evidence of SFRA was identified: several sensor features and three classification models differed significantly between groups with different fall risk (mostly fallers/non-fallers). Moreover, classification performance corresponding the AUCs of at least 0.74 and/or accuracies of at least 84% were obtained from sensor features in six studies and from classification models in seven studies. Specificity was at least as high as sensitivity among studies reporting both values. Insufficient use of prospective design, small sample size, low in-sample inclusion of participants with elevated fall risk, high amounts and low degree of consensus in used features, and limited use of recommended model validation methods were identified in the included studies. Hence, future SFRA research should further reduce risk of bias by continuously improving methodology.
first_indexed 2024-03-10T08:03:39Z
format Article
id doaj.art-1a246fdbd8244dfd86318a4aa87314be
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1424-8220
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-10T08:03:39Z
publishDate 2021-08-01
publisher MDPI AG
record_format Article
series Sensors
spelling doaj.art-1a246fdbd8244dfd86318a4aa87314be2023-11-22T11:13:37ZengMDPI AGSensors1424-82202021-08-012117586310.3390/s21175863Performance and Characteristics of Wearable Sensor Systems Discriminating and Classifying Older Adults According to Fall Risk: A Systematic ReviewAnnica Kristoffersson0Jiaying Du1Maria Ehn2School of Innovation, Design and Engineering, Mälardalen University, 722 20 Västerås, SwedenMotion Control i Västerås AB, 721 30 Västerås, SwedenSchool of Innovation, Design and Engineering, Mälardalen University, 722 20 Västerås, SwedenSensor-based fall risk assessment (SFRA) utilizes wearable sensors for monitoring individuals’ motions in fall risk assessment tasks. Previous SFRA reviews recommend methodological improvements to better support the use of SFRA in clinical practice. This systematic review aimed to investigate the existing evidence of SFRA (discriminative capability, classification performance) and methodological factors (study design, samples, sensor features, and model validation) contributing to the risk of bias. The review was conducted according to recommended guidelines and 33 of 389 screened records were eligible for inclusion. Evidence of SFRA was identified: several sensor features and three classification models differed significantly between groups with different fall risk (mostly fallers/non-fallers). Moreover, classification performance corresponding the AUCs of at least 0.74 and/or accuracies of at least 84% were obtained from sensor features in six studies and from classification models in seven studies. Specificity was at least as high as sensitivity among studies reporting both values. Insufficient use of prospective design, small sample size, low in-sample inclusion of participants with elevated fall risk, high amounts and low degree of consensus in used features, and limited use of recommended model validation methods were identified in the included studies. Hence, future SFRA research should further reduce risk of bias by continuously improving methodology.https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/21/17/5863fall riskclassificationassessmentolder adultsinertial sensorswearable sensors
spellingShingle Annica Kristoffersson
Jiaying Du
Maria Ehn
Performance and Characteristics of Wearable Sensor Systems Discriminating and Classifying Older Adults According to Fall Risk: A Systematic Review
Sensors
fall risk
classification
assessment
older adults
inertial sensors
wearable sensors
title Performance and Characteristics of Wearable Sensor Systems Discriminating and Classifying Older Adults According to Fall Risk: A Systematic Review
title_full Performance and Characteristics of Wearable Sensor Systems Discriminating and Classifying Older Adults According to Fall Risk: A Systematic Review
title_fullStr Performance and Characteristics of Wearable Sensor Systems Discriminating and Classifying Older Adults According to Fall Risk: A Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Performance and Characteristics of Wearable Sensor Systems Discriminating and Classifying Older Adults According to Fall Risk: A Systematic Review
title_short Performance and Characteristics of Wearable Sensor Systems Discriminating and Classifying Older Adults According to Fall Risk: A Systematic Review
title_sort performance and characteristics of wearable sensor systems discriminating and classifying older adults according to fall risk a systematic review
topic fall risk
classification
assessment
older adults
inertial sensors
wearable sensors
url https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/21/17/5863
work_keys_str_mv AT annicakristoffersson performanceandcharacteristicsofwearablesensorsystemsdiscriminatingandclassifyingolderadultsaccordingtofallriskasystematicreview
AT jiayingdu performanceandcharacteristicsofwearablesensorsystemsdiscriminatingandclassifyingolderadultsaccordingtofallriskasystematicreview
AT mariaehn performanceandcharacteristicsofwearablesensorsystemsdiscriminatingandclassifyingolderadultsaccordingtofallriskasystematicreview