ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2024
Feature importance for estimating rating of perceived exertion from cardiorespiratory signals using machine learning.
Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Survey of Preferences for Sensing Technologies in People with Severe Mental Illness Admitted to an Acute Psychiatric Unit.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2025Article
- Identification of Athleticism and Sports Profiles Throughout Machine Learning Applied to Heart Rate Variability.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The purpose of this study is to investigate the importance of respiratory features, relative to heart rate (HR), when estimating rating of perceived exertion (RPE) using machine learning models. Methods: A total of 20 participants aged 18 to 43 were recruited to carry out Yo-Yo level-1 intermittent recovery tests, while wearing a COSMED K5 portable metabolic machine. RPE information was collected throughout the Yo-Yo test for each participant. Three regression models (linear, random forest, and a multi-layer perceptron) were tested with 8 training features (HR, minute ventilation (VE), respiratory frequency (Rf), volume of oxygen consumed (VO2), age, gender, weight, and height). Results: Using a leave-one-subject-out cross validation, the random forest model was found to be the most accurate, with a root mean square error of 1.849, and a mean absolute error of 1.461 ± 1.133. Feature importance was estimated via permutation feature importance, and VE was found to be the most important for all three models followed by HR. Discussion: Future works that aim to estimate RPE using wearable sensors should therefore consider using a combination of cardiovascular and respiratory data.
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.