Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34346890›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2021

Comparison of the Validity and Generalizability of Machine Learning Algorithms for the Prediction of Energy Expenditure: Validation Study.

Ruairi O'Driscoll, Jake Turicchi, Mark Hopkins, Cristiana Duarte, Graham W Horgan, Graham Finlayson, R James Stubbs

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Do eating behavior traits predict energy intake and body mass index? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Diet composition and energy intake in humans.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Predicting stroke and mortality in mitral stenosis with atrial flutter: A machine learning approach.Annals of noninvasive electrocardiology : the official journal of the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Inc · 2023
    Article
  14. Review
  15. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ruairi O'Driscoll *Appetite Control and Energy Balance Group, School of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3995-0073
Jake TuricchiAppetite Control and Energy Balance Group, School of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1174-813X
Mark HopkinsSchool of Food Science and Nutrition, Faculty of Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7655-0215
Cristiana DuarteAppetite Control and Energy Balance Group, School of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6566-273X
Graham W HorganBiomathematics & Statistics Scotland, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6048-1374
Graham FinlaysonAppetite Control and Energy Balance Group, School of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-5620-2256
R James StubbsAppetite Control and Energy Balance Group, School of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0843-9064
University of Leeds · GBBiomathematics and Statistics Scotland · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_18053
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurate solutions for the estimation of physical activity and energy expenditure at scale are needed for a range of medical and health research fields. Machine learning techniques show promise in research-grade accelerometers, and some evidence indicates that these techniques can be applied to more scalable commercial devices.

objectiveThis study aims to test the validity and out-of-sample generalizability of algorithms for the prediction of energy expenditure in several wearables (ie, Fitbit Charge 2, ActiGraph GT3-x, SenseWear Armband Mini, and Polar H7) using two laboratory data sets comprising different activities.

methodsTwo laboratory studies (study 1: n=59, age 44.4 years, weight 75.7 kg; study 2: n=30, age=31.9 years, weight=70.6 kg), in which adult participants performed a sequential lab-based activity protocol consisting of resting, household, ambulatory, and nonambulatory tasks, were combined in this study. In both studies, accelerometer and physiological data were collected from the wearables alongside energy expenditure using indirect calorimetry. Three regression algorithms were used to predict metabolic equivalents (METs; ie, random forest, gradient boosting, and neural networks), and five classification algorithms (ie, k-nearest neighbor, support vector machine, random forest, gradient boosting, and neural networks) were used for physical activity intensity classification as sedentary, light, or moderate to vigorous. Algorithms were evaluated using leave-one-subject-out cross-validations and out-of-sample validations.

resultsThe root mean square error (RMSE) was lowest for gradient boosting applied to SenseWear and Polar H7 data (0.91 METs), and in the classification task, gradient boost applied to SenseWear and Polar H7 was the most accurate (85.5%). Fitbit models achieved an RMSE of 1.36 METs and 78.2% accuracy for classification. Errors tended to increase in out-of-sample validations with the SenseWear neural network achieving RMSE values of 1.22 METs in the regression tasks and the SenseWear gradient boost and random forest achieving an accuracy of 80% in classification tasks.

conclusionsAlgorithms trained on combined data sets demonstrated high predictive accuracy, with a tendency for superior performance of random forests and gradient boosting for most but not all wearable devices. Predictions were poorer in the between-study validations, which creates uncertainty regarding the generalizability of the tested algorithms.

Indexed as

AccelerometryMachine LearningAdultAlgorithmsCalorimetry, IndirectEnergy MetabolismHumansaccelerometersbioenergeticsenergy balancemachine learningvalidation

Identifiers

PMID34346890
PMCPMC8374660
OpenAlexW3192313172

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.