Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30625153›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Segmenting accelerometer data from daily life with unsupervised machine learning.

Dafne van Kuppevelt, Joe Heywood, Mark Hamer, Séverine Sabia, Emla Fitzsimons, Vincent van Hees

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06169020 (Design of an Intelligent Wearable to Assess Physical Activity and Health Related Outcomes - the DIWAH Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06169020 naenrolling by invitationnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Design of an Intelligent Wearable to Assess Physical Activity and Health Related Outcomes - the DIWAH Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorLinnaeus UniversityRan2023 to 2027Enrolled50ConditionsHealth PromotionArmsResting and maximal oxygen consumtion, Free living energy expenditure
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Physical activity assessment by accelerometry in people with heart failure.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Dafne van KuppeveltNetherlands eScience Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2662-1994
Joe HeywoodCentre for Longitudinal Studies, UCL Institute of Education, London, United Kingdom.
Mark HamerSchool Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom.
Séverine SabiaINSERM, U1018, Centre for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health, Paris, France.
Emla FitzsimonsCentre for Longitudinal Studies, UCL Institute of Education, London, United Kingdom.
Vincent van HeesNetherlands eScience Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K013351/1Medical Research Council MR/R024227/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAccelerometers are increasingly used to obtain valuable descriptors of physical activity for health research. The cut-points approach to segment accelerometer data is widely used in physical activity research but requires resource expensive calibration studies and does not make it easy to explore the information that can be gained for a variety of raw data metrics. To address these limitations, we present a data-driven approach for segmenting and clustering the accelerometer data using unsupervised machine learning.

methodsThe data used came from five hundred fourteen-year-old participants from the Millennium cohort study who wore an accelerometer (GENEActiv) on their wrist on one weekday and one weekend day. A Hidden Semi-Markov Model (HSMM), configured to identify a maximum of ten behavioral states from five second averaged acceleration with and without addition of x, y, and z-angles, was used for segmenting and clustering of the data. A cut-points approach was used as comparison.

resultsTime spent in behavioral states with or without angle metrics constituted eight and five principal components to reach 95% explained variance, respectively; in comparison four components were identified with the cut-points approach. In the HSMM with acceleration and angle as input, the distributions for acceleration in the states showed similar groupings as the cut-points categories, while more variety was seen in the distribution of angles.

conclusionOur unsupervised classification approach learns a construct of human behavior based on the data it observes, without the need for resource expensive calibration studies, has the ability to combine multiple data metrics, and offers a higher dimensional description of physical behavior. States are interpretable from the distributions of observations and by their duration.

Indexed as

Unsupervised Machine LearningAccelerometryExerciseHumans

Identifiers

PMID30625153
PMCPMC6326431

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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 OpenQuestion graph.