ArticlePhysical activity and nutrition2025
Quantifying the uncertainty of human activity recognition using a Bayesian machine learning method: a prediction study.
Article in Physical activity and nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Physical Activity Assessment-Self-Reported Versus Pedometer-Measured, and Associations with Health Markers Among University Students in South Africa.International journal of environmental research and public health · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMachine learning methods accurately predict physical activity outcomes using accelerometer data generated by wearable devices. Thus, they allow investigation of the impact of the built environment on population physical activity. Although traditional machine learning methods do not provide prediction uncertainty, a new method, Bayesian Additive Regression Trees (BART), can quantify such uncertainty as a posterior predictive distribution. Our objective was to evaluate the performance of BART in regard to predicting physical activity status.
methodsWe applied multinomial BART and a benchmark method, random forest, to accelerometer data at 25,424 time points generated by wearable devices worn by 37 participants. We evaluated the prediction accuracy, F1 scores, and confusion matrices using leave-one-person-out cross-validation.
resultsBART and random forest demonstrated comparable prediction performances.
conclusionBART is a relatively novel machine learning method that can advance the incorporation of the predicted physical activity status into built environment research. Future research should evaluate the association between the environment and physical activity as predicted by BART.
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.