Embedded Assessment: Overcoming Barriers to Early Detection with Pervasive Computing

  • Margaret Morris
  • Stephen S. Intille
  • Jennifer S. Beaudin
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3468)


Embedded assessment leverages the capabilities of pervasive computing to advance early detection of health conditions. In this approach, technologies embedded in the home setting are used to establish personalized baselines against which later indices of health status can be compared. Our ethnographic and concept feedback studies suggest that adoption of such health technologies among end users will be increased if monitoring is woven into preventive and compensatory health applications, such that the integrated system provides value beyond assessment. We review health technology advances in the three areas of monitoring, compensation, and prevention. We then define embedded assessment in terms of these three components. The validation of pervasive computing systems for early detection involves unique challenges due to conflicts between the exploratory nature of these systems and the validation criteria of medical research audiences. We discuss an approach for demonstrating value that incorporates ethnographic observation and new ubiquitous computing tools for behavioral observation in naturalistic settings such as the home.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Morris, M., Lundell, J., Dishman, E., Needham, B.: New perspectives on ubiquitous computing from ethnographic study of elders with cognitive decline. In: Dey, A.K., Schmidt, A., McCarthy, J.F. (eds.) UbiComp 2003. LNCS, vol. 2864, pp. 227–242. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lundell, J., Morris, M.: Tales, tours, tools, and troupes: A tiered research method to inform ubiquitous designs for the elderly. In: Fincher, et al. (eds.) People and Computers XVIII - Design for Life, pp. 165–177. Springer, London (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gorin, A.A., Stone, A.A.: Recall biases and cognitive errors in retrospective self reports: A call for momentary assessments. In: Baum, A., Revenson, T., Singer, J. (eds.) Handbook of Health Psychology, pp. 405–413. Erlbaum, Mahwah (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kennepohl, S., et al.: African American acculturation and neuropsychological test performance following traumatic brain injury. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society 10, 566–577 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hirsch, T., et al.: The ELDer Project: social, emotional, and environmental factors in the design of eldercare technologies. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Universal Usability (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bingham, S.: The dietary assessment of individuals: methods, accuracy, new te chniques and recommendations. Nutr. Abstr. Rev. 57, 705–742 (1987)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mynatt, E.D., Essa, I., Rogers, W.: Increasing the opportunities for aging in place. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Universal Usability, pp. 65–71 (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Munguia Tapia, E., Intille, S.S., Larson, K.: Activity recognition in the home setting using simple and ubiquitous sensors. In: Ferscha, A., Mattern, F. (eds.) Proceedings of PERVASIVE 2004, pp. 158–175. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Philipose, M., et al.: Guide: Towards understanding daily life via auto-identification and statistical analysis. In: Ubihealth 2003: The 2nd International Workshop on Ubiquitous Computing for Pervasive Healthcare Applications (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wilson, D., Atkeson, C.: Automatic health monitoring using anonymous, binary sensors. In: CHI Workshop on Keeping Elders Connected (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Matsouoka, K.: Smart house understanding human behaviors: Who did what, where, and when. In: Proceedings of the 8th World Multi-Conference on Systems, Cybernetics, and Informatics, vol. 3, pp. 181–185 (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Haigh, K.Z., et al.: The Independent LifeStyle AssistantTM (I.L.S.A.): Lessons Learned. Honeywell Laboratories, Minneapolis (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Korhonen, I., Paavilainen, P., Särelä, A.: Application of ubiquitous computing technologies for support of independent living of the elderly in real life settings. In: UbiHealth 2003: The 2nd International Workshop on Ubiquitous Computing for Pervasive Healthcare Applications (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mihailidis, A., et al.: An intelligent environment to support aging-in-place, safety, and independence of older adults with dementia. In: UbiHealth 2003: The 2nd International Workshop on Ubiquitous Computing for Pervasive Healthcare Applications (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Barger, T., Brown, D., Alwan, M.: Health status monitoring through analysis of behavioral patterns. In: Proceedings of the 8th Congress of the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence (AI*IA) on Ambient Intelligence. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dockstader, S.L., Berg, M.J., Tekalp, A.M.: Stochastic kinematic modeling and feature extraction for gait analysis. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 12(8), 962–976 (2003)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Patterson, D.J., et al.: Inferring high-level behavior from low-level sensors. In: Dey, A.K., Schmidt, A., McCarthy, J.F. (eds.) UbiComp 2003. LNCS, vol. 2864, pp. 73–89. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jimison, H.B., et al.: Home monitoring of computer interactions for the early detection of cognitive decline. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Conference (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mynatt, B.D., Rogers, W.A.: Developing technology to support the functional independence of older adults. Aging International 27(1), 24–41 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pollack, M.E., et al.: Autominder: an intelligent cognitive orthotic system for people with memory impairment. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 44(3-4), 273–282 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Floerkemeier, C., Siegemund, F.: Improving the effectiveness of medical treatment with pervasive computing technologies. In: UbiHealth 2003: The 2nd International Workshop on Ubiquitous Computing for Pervasive Healthcare Applications (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Morris, M., Lundell, J., Dishman, E.: Ubiquitous computing for Mild Cognitive Impairment: A prototype for embedded assessment and rehearsal. The Gerontologist, 403 (2003)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Morris, M., Lundell, J., Dishman, E.: Computing for social connectedness. In: Proceedings of CHI 2004 (2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    nTag Interactive, nTAG (2004)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Intille, S.S.: A new research challenge: persuasive technology to motivate healthy aging. Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine 8(3), 235–237 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fogg, B.J.: Persuasive technologies. Communications of the ACM 42(5), 27–29 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mankoff, J., et al.: Using low-cost sensing to support nutritional awareness. In: Borriello, G., Holmquist, L.E. (eds.) UbiComp 2002. LNCS, vol. 2498, pp. 371–378. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Winzelberg, A.J., et al.: Effectiveness of an Internet-based program for reducing risk factors for eating disorders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 68, 125–138 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Anderson, E.S., et al.: A computerized social cognitive intervention for nutrition behavior: Direct and mediated effects on fat, fiber, fruits, and vegetables, self-efficacy, and outcome expectations among food shoppers. Annals of Behavioral Medicine 23(2), 88–100 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Fratiglioni, L., Paillard-Bord, S., Winblad, B.: An active and socially integrated lifestyle in late life might protect against dementia. Lancet 3, 343–353 (2004)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    UbiHealth 2003: The 2nd International Workshop on Ubiquitous Computing for Pervasive helthcare Applications (2003)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Intille, S.S., et al.: A living laboratory for the design and evaluation of ubiquitous computing interfaces. In: Extended Abstracts of the 2005 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Intille, S.S., et al.: Tools for studying behavior and technology in natural settings. In: Dey, A.K., Schmidt, A., McCarthy, J.F. (eds.) UbiComp 2003. LNCS, vol. 2864, pp. 157–174. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Margaret Morris
    • 1
  • Stephen S. Intille
    • 2
  • Jennifer S. Beaudin
    • 2
  1. 1.Proactive Health, Intel Research, JF3-377HillsboroUSA
  2. 2.House_n, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations