ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Effects of Sampling Frequency on Human Activity Recognition with Machine Learning Aiming at Clinical Applications.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Minimal Sensor Configuration for Human Activity Recognition in Patients With Hip Osteoarthritis: Proof-of-Concept Study.JMIR biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- A systematic review of prolonged posture monitoring with accelerometer-based wearable sensors.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Wearables for Telemonitoring in ATTR-Amyloidosis: Current Perspectives.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- An in-home engagement and usability study of GeRI: an open-source platform for remote symptom assessment and wearable activity monitoring in men with prostate cancer.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- The Impact of the Accelerometer Sampling Rate on the Performance of Machine and Deep Learning Models in Wearable Fall-Detection Systems.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Unmasking the Clever Hans effect in AI models: shortcut learning, spurious correlations, and the path toward robust intelligence.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
Human activity recognition using wearable accelerometer data can be a useful digital biomarker for severity assessment and the diagnosis of diseases, where the relationship between onset and patient activity is crucial. For long-term monitoring in clinical settings, the volume of data collected over time should be minimized to reduce power consumption, computational load, and communication volume. This study aimed to determine the lowest sampling frequency that maintains recognition accuracy for each activity. Thirty healthy participants wore nine-axis accelerometer sensors at five body locations and performed nine activities. Machine-learning-based activity recognition was conducted using data sampled at 100, 50, 25, 20, 10, and 1 Hz. Data from the non-dominant wrist and chest, which have previously shown high recognition accuracy, were used. Reducing the sampling frequency to 10 Hz did not significantly affect the recognition accuracy for either location. However, lowering the frequency to 1 Hz decreases the accuracy of many activities, particularly brushing teeth. Using data with a 10 Hz sampling frequency can maintain recognition accuracy while decreasing data volume, enabling long-term patient monitoring and device miniaturization for clinical applications.
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.