ArticleInternational journal of exercise science2021
Ordinal Statistical Models of Physical Activity Levels from Accelerometer Data.
Article in International journal of exercise science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Data Analytics in Physical Activity Studies With Accelerometers: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Improvements in accelerometer technology has led to new types of data on which more powerful predictive models can be built to assess physical activity. This paper explains and implements ordinal random forest and partial proportional odds models which both take into account the ordinality of responses given explanatory accelerometer data. The data analyzed comes from 28 adults performing activities of daily living in two visits while wearing accelerometers on the ankle, hip, right and left wrist. The first visit provided training data and the second testing data so that an independent sample, cross-validation approach could be used. We found that ordinal random forest produces similar accuracy rates and better linearly weighted kappa values than random forest. On the testing set, the ankle produced the best accuracy rates (33.3%), followed by the left wrist (34.7%), hip (36.9%) and then the right wrist (37.3%) using the best performing decision model for a four-activity level response. Linearly weighted kappa values indicated substantial agreement. For a two-activity level response, the error rates on the ankle, hip, left wrist and right wrist were 15.5%, 15.9%, 16.5% and 18.8%, respectively. The partial proportional odds model had significant goodness of fit (
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.