PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Kluge, Felix AU - Del Din, Silvia AU - Cereatti, Andrea AU - Gaßner, Heiko AU - Hansen, Clint AU - Helbostadt, Jorunn L AU - Klucken, Jochen AU - Küderle, Arne AU - Müller, Arne AU - Rochester, Lynn AU - Ullrich, Martin AU - Eskofier, Bjoern M AU - Mazzà, Claudia AU - on behalf of the Mobilise-D consortium TI - Consensus based framework for digital mobility monitoring AID - 10.1101/2020.12.18.20248404 DP - 2020 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2020.12.18.20248404 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/12/22/2020.12.18.20248404.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/12/22/2020.12.18.20248404.full AB - Digital mobility assessment using wearable sensor systems has the potential to capture walking performance in a patient’s natural environment. It enables the monitoring of health status and disease progression and outcome evaluation of interventions in real-world situations. In contrast to laboratory settings, real-world walking occurs in non-conventional environments and under unconstrained and uncontrolled conditions. Despite the general understanding, there is a lack of agreed definitions about what constitutes real-world walking, impeding the comparison and interpretation of the acquired data across systems and studies. Hence, there is a need for a terminological framework for the guidance of further algorithmic implementation of digital measures for gait assessment. We used an objective methodology based on an adapted Delphi process to obtain consensus on specific terminology related to real-world walking by asking a diverse panel of clinical, scientific, and industrial stakeholders. Six constituents (‘real-world’, ‘walking’, ‘purposeful’, ‘walking bout’, ‘walking speed’, ‘turning’) have successfully been defined in two feedback rounds. The identification of a consented set of real-world walking definitions has important implications for the development of assessment and analysis protocols, as well as for the reporting and comparison of digital mobility outcomes across studies and systems. The definitions will serve as a common framework for implementing digital and mobile technologies for gait assessment.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThe MOBILISE-D project has received funding from the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking under grant agreement No. 820820. This Joint Undertaking receives support from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA). BME gratefully acknowledges the support of the German Research Foundation (DFG) within the framework of the Heisenberg professorship program (grant number ES 434/8-1). SDD and LR are supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Newcastle Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) based at Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and Newcastle University. The work was also supported by the NIHR/Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Facility (CRF) infrastructure at Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. CM is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Sheffield Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) based at Sheffield Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and University of Sheffield. All opinions are those of the authors and not the funders.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethical approval for this study was granted by the ethics committee of the University Hospital Erlangen, Germany (Re.-No. 241_19 Bc). All participants provided informed consent for inclusion in the study.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe datasets generated and analysed in the study are available in the Zenodo repository, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4316564 The code is available on https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4316739 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4316564 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4316739