Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T15:15:44.269Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Data analysis from cognitive games interaction in Smart TV applications for patients with Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, and other types of dementia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 December 2019

Juan Pedro López*
Affiliation:
Grupo de Aplicación de Telecomunicaciones Visuales, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros de Telecomunicación, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 28040Madrid, Spain
Francisco Moreno
Affiliation:
Grupo de Aplicación de Telecomunicaciones Visuales, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros de Telecomunicación, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 28040Madrid, Spain
Mirela Popa
Affiliation:
Department of Data Science and Knowledge Engineering, Faculty of Science and Engineering, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands
Gustavo Hernández-Peñaloza
Affiliation:
Grupo de Aplicación de Telecomunicaciones Visuales, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros de Telecomunicación, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 28040Madrid, Spain
Federico Álvarez
Affiliation:
Grupo de Aplicación de Telecomunicaciones Visuales, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros de Telecomunicación, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 28040Madrid, Spain
*
Author for correspondence: Juan Pedro López, E-mail: juanpelopez@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease are progressive nervous system disorders that affect physical and cognitive capacities of individuals, including memory loss, motion impairment, or problem-solving dysfunctions. Leisure activities are associated with reducing the risk of dementia and are preventive policies for delaying the cognitive impairment in later stages of those neurodegenerative diseases. Electronic games related to cognitive abilities are an easy and inexpensive alternative for stimulating brain activity in this kind of patients. The previous research demonstrated the acceptance of these activities in the environment of Connected TV when playing at home and in daily care centers. Interaction in Connected TV applications has its own particularities that influence the design of the interface, including the viewing distance, the type of interaction through a remote control or other techniques, the size of the screen, or the collectiveness of consumption. Iterative testing with patients of these groups revealed how the physical characteristics and cognitive impairment of these concrete end-users affect the human–computer interaction, offering guidelines and recommendations in good practices for the Smart TV interface design. On the other hand, data analytics extracted from the interaction and evolution of the game offer important information enabling the creation of estimation prediction models about the cognitive state of the patient.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Iterative testing process.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Old icon for medicine (left), changed icon (right).

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Devices for interaction contemplated in tests: (a) television remote control (approximately 5 cm × 22 cm), (b) small remote control (4 cm × 12 cm), (c) mouse (approximately 6 cm × 10 cm), (d) gamepad (10.5 cm × 15 cm), and (e) special controller (11.5 cm × 21 cm).

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Specific devices used for interaction in research: Android TV remote control (left) and special mouse for PD patients (right).

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Interface of “Memory” game.

Figure 5

Fig. 6. Interface of “Words” game.

Figure 6

Fig. 7. Interface of “Trivial” game.

Figure 7

Fig. 8. Interface of “Bingo” game.

Figure 8

Table 1. Profiles of patients participating in this research

Figure 9

Table 2. Distribution of testing groups depending on cognitive abilities with age and gender information

Figure 10

Fig. 9. Time needed to complete the memory game versus cognitive status labels.

Figure 11

Fig. 10. Comparative analysis of the time needed to complete the memory games versus the level of the game.

Figure 12

Fig. 11. Total time needed to complete the Bingo game.

Figure 13

Fig. 12. Difficulty or level (a) and time needed to complete the memory game (b).

Figure 14

Fig. 13. Time needed to complete the trivial game (a) and the achieved score relative to the game level (b).

Figure 15

Fig. 14. Time needed to complete the Guess what or who is game.

Figure 16

Fig. 15. Score (a) and time (b) needed to complete the Word guessing game.