Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study introduces two comprehensive validation protocols for evaluating the performance of RGB and RGB-D cameras in indoor healthcare monitoring, addressing the shortcomings of existing assessments that often overlook real-world deployment factors. The protocols systematically assess five cameras under varying conditions, revealing significant discrepancies in metrological performance, particularly in depth accuracy, while pose estimation accuracy remains relatively consistent across devices. The findings underscore the importance of selecting appropriate cameras based on their specific performance characteristics, which can greatly impact the effectiveness of monitoring systems in clinical settings.
Depth accuracy varies dramatically across cameras, with biases ranging from 50 mm to over 1400 mm, highlighting the critical need for informed camera selection in healthcare monitoring.
Camera-based monitoring systems are increasingly adopted in healthcare settings for the continuous assessment of patient movement and activities. However, their technical performance under real-world indoor conditions remains insufficiently characterised, preventing appropriate camera selection for clinical or home adoption and reproducibility. Existing validation studies typically assess either device metrological performance or algorithm accuracy in isolation, and often do not systematically account for practical deployment factors, such as lighting variability, occlusions, and camera positioning. We present two technical validation protocols: the first evaluates the metrological performance of RGB and RGB-D cameras, and the second assesses their use in supporting human pose estimation, validated using state-of-the-art pose estimators. The proposed protocols systematically assess five cameras, four RGB-D and one RGB, under controlled variations in lighting, camera height, viewing angle, and occlusion level within representative indoor scenarios. The experimental results show that metrological performance varies substantially across cameras, with depth bias at 5 m ranging from 50 mm to over 1400 mm depending on the device. For 2D pose estimation, all cameras achieve broadly comparable accuracy, with mean mAP between approximately 78% and 90% across cameras and estimators, whereas 3D reconstruction error differs markedly across devices, with MPJPE ranging from 104 mm to 365 mm, closely reflecting underlying depth-sensing quality. Environmental factors have a camera- and estimator-dependent effect on 3D performance, while camera mounting height has minimal influence within the evaluated range. This work provides evidence-based guidance for the selection and deployment of cameras in healthcare monitoring applications, addressing an important gap in current technical validation practice.
