ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Using Computer Vision to Annotate Video-Recoded Direct Observation of Physical Behavior.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
- Sustainable walkability around green, blue, and spiritual spaces in a semi-urban district of coastal Karnataka, India.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Classification of daily activities using a wireless instrumented insole (WalkinSense) in a semi free-living setting.PloS one · 2026Article
- Reducing annotation burden in physical activity research using vision language models.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Using Video Cameras to Assess Physical Activity and Other Well-Being Behaviors in Urban Environments: Feasibility, Reliability, and Participant Reactivity Studies.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2024Article
- Integrating OpenPose and SVM for Quantitative Postural Analysis in Young Adults: A Temporal-Spatial Approach.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Direct observation is a ground-truth measure for physical behavior, but the high cost limits widespread use. The purpose of this study was to develop and test machine learning methods to recognize aspects of physical behavior and location from videos of human movement: Adults (N = 26, aged 18-59 y) were recorded in their natural environment for two, 2- to 3-h sessions. Trained research assistants annotated videos using commercially available software including the following taxonomies: (1) sedentary versus non-sedentary (two classes); (2) activity type (four classes: sedentary, walking, running, and mixed movement); and (3) activity intensity (four classes: sedentary, light, moderate, and vigorous). Four machine learning approaches were trained and evaluated for each taxonomy. Models were trained on 80% of the videos, validated on 10%, and final accuracy is reported on the remaining 10% of the videos not used in training. Overall accuracy was as follows: 87.4% for Taxonomy 1, 63.1% for Taxonomy 2, and 68.6% for Taxonomy 3. This study shows it is possible to use computer vision to annotate aspects of physical behavior, speeding up the time and reducing labor required for direct observation. Future research should test these machine learning models on larger, independent datasets and take advantage of analysis of video fragments, rather than individual still images.
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.