ArticleArXiv2026
An Open-Source, Open Data Approach to Activity Classification from Triaxial Accelerometry in an Ambulatory Setting.
Article in ArXiv, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The accelerometer has become an almost ubiquitous device, providing enormous opportunities in healthcare monitoring beyond step counting or other average energy estimates in 15-60 second epochs. Ob jective: To develop an open data set with associated open-source code for processing 50 Hz tri-axial accelerometry-based to classify patient activity levels and natural types of movement. Approach: Data were collected from 23 healthy subjects (16 males and seven females) aged between 23 and 62 years using an ambulatory device, which included a triaxial accelerometer and synchronous lead II equivalent ECG for an average of 26 minutes each. Participants followed a standardized activity routine involving five distinct activities: lying, sitting, standing, walking, and jogging. Two classifiers were constructed: a signal processing technique to distinguish between high and low activity levels and a convolutional neural network (CNN)-based approach to classify each of the five activities. Main results: The binary (high/low) activity classifier exhibited an F1 score of 0.79. The multi-class CNN-based classifier provided an F1 score of 0.83. The code for this analysis has been made available under an open-source license together with the data on which the classifiers were trained and tested. Significance: The classification of behavioral activity, as demonstrated in this study, offers valuable context for interpreting traditional health metrics and may provide contextual information to support the future development of clinical decisionmaking tools for patient monitoring, predictive analytics, and personalized health interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41994175PMC13082138What 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.