Home-based monitor for gait and activity analysis

Current outcomes in neuromuscular disorder clinical trials include motor function scales, timed tests, and strength measures performed by trained clinical evaluators. These measures are slightly subjective and are performed during a visit to a clinic or hospital and constitute therefore a point assessment. Point assessments can be influenced by daily patient condition or factors such as fatigue, motivation, and intercurrent illness. To enable home-based monitoring of gait and activity, a wearable magneto-inertial sensor (WMIS) has been developed. This device is a movement monitor composed of two very light watch-like sensors and a docking station. Each sensor contains a tri-axial accelerometer, gyroscope, magnetometer, and a barometer that record linear acceleration, angular velocity, the magnetic field of the movement in all directions, and barometric altitude, respectively. The sensors can be worn on the wrist, ankle, or wheelchair to record the subject's movements during the day. The docking station enables data uploading and recharging of sensor batteries during the night. Data are analyzed using proprietary algorithms to compute parameters representative of the type and intensity of the performed movement. This WMIS can record a set of digital biomarkers, including cumulative variables, such as total number of meters walked, and descriptive gait variables, such as the percentage of the most rapid or longest stride that represents the top performance of patient over a predefined period of time

DMD/BMD – OUTCOME MEASURES

peer reviewe

CIPM key comparison CCPR-K1.a.2017 for spectral irradiance 250 nm to 2500 nm. Final report

This report describes the Key Comparison of the Consultative Committee for Photometry and Radiometry CCPR-K1.a.2017 for Spectral Irradiance in the wavelength range of 250 nm to 2500 nm. Tungsten quartz halogen lamps of the FEL type (1000 W) were used as artefacts. Each participant used its own set of lamps. The star scheme of measurements was applied with the sequence participant - pilot - participant. Twelve National Metrology Institutes participated in the comparison. Each participant's measurement data were based on a totally independent spectral irradiance scale realisation. VNIIOFI (the Russian Federation) served as a pilot. The measurements were carried out from 2017 - 2020. The analysis of the comparison was performed following the step-by-step approach described in Appendix B of the Guidelines for CCPR Key Comparison Report Preparation (CCPR-G2 Rev.4). The key comparison reference values (KCRV) were calculated independently at each wavelength as the weighted means with cut-off. The measurement data of all participants were used for the KCRV excluding just a few outliers in the wavelength range of 1700 nm to 2500 nm. The relative uncertainties of the KCRV were minimal, 0.08 %, at the wavelengths of 900 nm to 1500 nm and increasing towards the limits of the spectral range up to 0.28 % at 250 nm and 0.20 % at 2500 nm. Consistency checks were satisfied at 17 of the 28 measured wavelengths, but failed at 11 wavelengths, mostly in the infrared range. For the latter wavelengths the Mandel-Paule method was applied resulting in an additional uncertainty that varied depending on wavelength from 0.11 % to 0.89 %. In general, the measurement uncertainties submitted by the participants in this comparison were less than those submitted in the previous CCPR-K1.a comparison. This is evidenced by the values of the cut-off, which had decreased at all wavelengths by a factor of 1.2 to 3.0 depending on wavelength. However, only for seven participants the degrees of equivalence do not exceed the expanded uncertainties at almost all wavelengths. About 80 % of all results (all participants at all wavelengths) agree with the KCRV within 1 % over the whole spectral range and within 0.7 % in the visible, which is comparable with the results of the previous CCPR-K1.a comparison. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database https://www.bipm.org/kcdb/. The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCPR, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).Peer reviewe