ArticleIEEE sensors journal2021
Detection of Food Intake Sensor's Wear Compliance in Free-Living.
Article in IEEE sensors journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review of Sensor-Based Methods for Measurement of Eating Behavior.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Pooled it
- Objective Assessment of Media Screens Effect on Physical Activity in Preschool Children.IEEE access : practical innovations, open solutions · 2026Article
- Objective assessment of shared plate eating using a wearable camera in urban and rural households in Ghana.Frontiers in nutrition · 2024Article
- I2N: image to nutrients, a sensor guided semi-automated tool for annotation of images for nutrition analysis of eating episodes.Frontiers in nutrition · 2023Article
- The spectrum of eating environments encountered in free living adults documented using a passive capture food intake wearable device.Frontiers in nutrition · 2023Article
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
Abstract
Objective detection of periods of wear and non-wear is critical for human studies that rely on information from wearable sensors, such as food intake sensors. In this paper, we present a novel method of compliance detection on the example of the Automatic Ingestion Monitor v2 (AIM-2) sensor, containing a tri-axial accelerometer, a still camera, and a chewing sensor. The method was developed and validated using data from a study of 30 participants aged 18-39, each wearing the AIM-2 for two days (a day in pseudo-free-living and a day in free-living). Four types of wear compliance were analyzed: 'normal-wear', 'non-compliant-wear', 'non-wear-carried', and 'non-wear-stationary'. The ground truth of those four types of compliance was obtained by reviewing the images of the egocentric camera. The features for compliance detection were the standard deviation of acceleration, average pitch, and roll angles, and mean square error of two consecutive images. These were used to train three random forest classifiers 1) accelerometer-based, 2) image-based, and 3) combined accelerometer and image-based. Satisfactory wear compliance measurement accuracy was obtained using the combined classifier (89.24%) on leave one subject out cross-validation. The average duration of compliant wear in the study was 9h with a standard deviation of 2h or 70.96% of total on-time. This method can be used to calculate the wear and non-wear time of AIM-2, and potentially be extended to other devices. The study also included assessments of sensor burden and privacy concerns. The survey results suggest recommendations that may be used to increase wear compliance.
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.