ArticlePloS one2020
Discrimination of wear and non-wear in infants using data from hip- and ankle-worn devices.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionA key component to analyzing wearable sensor data is identifying periods of non-wear. Traditionally, strings of consecutive zero counts (e.g. >60-minutes) are identified indicating periods of non-movement. The non-movement window length is then evaluated as wear or non-wear. Given that non-movement is not equivalent to non-wear, additional criteria should be evaluated to objectively identify periods of non-wear. Identifying non-wear is especially challenging in infants due to their sporadic movement, sleep frequency, and proportion of caregiver-generated movement. PURPOSE: To use hip- and ankle-worn ActiGraph wGT3X-BT (wGT3X-BT) data to identify non-wear in infants.
methodsFifteen infant participants [mean±SD; age, 8.7±1.7 weeks (range 5.4-11.3 weeks); 5.1±0.8 kg; 56.2±2.1 cm; n = 8 females] wore a wGT3X-BT on the hip and ankle. Criterion data were collected during two, 2-hour directly observed periods in the laboratory. Using raw 30 Hz acceleration data, a vector magnitude and the inclination angle of each individual axis were calculated before being averaged into 1-minute windows. Three decision tree models were developed using data from 1) hip only, 2) ankle only, and 3) hip and ankle combined.
resultsThe hip model classified 86.6% of all minutes (wear and non-wear) correctly (F1 = 75.5%) compared to the ankle model which classified 90.6% of all minutes correctly (F1 = 83.0%). The combined site model performed similarly to the ankle model and correctly classified 90.0% of all minutes (F1 = 80.8%).
conclusionThe similar performance between the ankle only model and the combined site model likely indicates that the features from the ankle device are more important for identifying non-wear in infants. Overall, this approach provides an advancement in the identification of device wear status using wearable sensor data in infants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.