SynthesisFrontiers in computational neuroscience2026
Interpretable and explainable artificial intelligence for wearable sensor-based fall risk assessment in older adults: a systematic review with considerations for prosthetics and orthotics.
Synthesis in Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Falls among older adults are a leading cause of morbidity and loss of independence. Wearable sensors combined with machine learning (ML) offer opportunities for objective fall risk evaluation, but low model transparency limits clinical adoption. Interpretable and explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) methods can address this constraint, yet their application in wearable sensor-based fall risk assessment has not been systematically examined. Methods: A PRISMA 2020-compliant systematic review was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and IEEE Xplore. Studies were eligible if they included older adults, employed wearable sensors, hybrid sensor systems, or structured clinical assessment instruments, applied AI/ML for fall risk assessment (not detection), and incorporated intrinsic interpretability or Results: Eleven studies (2019-2025, total Conclusion: Current models favour interpretable architectures and achieve moderate-to-high performance, but are constrained by heterogeneous outcome definitions, absence of external validation, and global-only explainability that limits individual-level clinical utility. The evidence base does not yet support clinical deployment. Extending these findings to prosthetics and orthotics users, a clinically important downstream application, will require device-specific datasets, asymmetry-adjusted thresholds, and instance-level explanations. These represent the priority directions for the next stage of this research agenda.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.