Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39601870›Full record

ArticleExperimental brain research2024

Distinguishing among standing postures with machine learning-based classification algorithms.

Negar Rahimi, Alireza Kamankesh, Ioannis G Amiridis, Sajjad Daneshgar, Chrysostomos Sahinis, Vassilia Hatzitaki, Roger M Enoka

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental brain research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Negar RahimiDepartment of Integrative Physiology, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, 80309, USA.
Alireza KamankeshDepartment of Integrative Physiology, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, 80309, USA.
Ioannis G AmiridisLaboratory of Neuromechanics, Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences at Serres, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Serres, Greece.
Sajjad DaneshgarDepartment of Integrative Physiology, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, 80309, USA.
Chrysostomos SahinisLaboratory of Neuromechanics, Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences at Serres, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Serres, Greece.
Vassilia HatzitakiLaboratory of Motor Behavior and Adapted Physical Activity, Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Roger M EnokaDepartment of Integrative Physiology, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, 80309, USA. enoka@colorado.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7881-2397

Funding

National Multiple Sclerosis Society RG-2206-39688
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of our study was to evaluate the accuracy with which classification algorithms could distinguish among standing postures based on center-of-pressure (CoP) trajectories. We performed a secondary analysis of published data from three studies: Study A) assessment of balance control on firm or foam surfaces with eyes-open or closed, Study B) quantification of postural sway in forward-backward and side-to-side directions during four standing-balance tasks that differed in difficulty, and Study C) an evaluation of the impact of two modes of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation on balance control in older adults. Three classification algorithms (decision tree, random forest, and k-nearest neighbor) were used to classify standing postures based on the extracted features from CoP trajectories in both the time and time-frequency domains. Such classifications enable the identification of differences and similarities in control strategy. Our results, especially those involving time-frequency features, demonstrated that distinct CoP trajectories could be identified from the extracted features in all conditions and postures in each study. Although the overall classification accuracy was similar using time-frequency features (~ 86%) for the three studies, there were substantial differences in accuracy across conditions and postures in Studies A and B but not in Study C. Nonetheless, the models were far superior to the published results with conventional metrics in distinguishing between the conditions and postures. Moreover, a Shapley Additive exPlanation analysis was able to identify the most important features that contributed to the classification performance of the models.

Indexed as

Machine LearningPostural BalanceStanding PositionAdultAgedAlgorithmsFemaleHumansMalePostureCenter of pressureClassification algorithmsContinuous wavelet transformShapley additive explanationStanding postureTranscutaneous electrical nerve stimulation

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.