ArticleDigital health
Toward assessing functional decline in mild cognitive impairment using wearable sensors and explainable machine learning.
Article in Digital health. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objectives: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) poses serious threats to health, safety, and independence in older adults by elevating fall risk and undermining the ability to complete essential tasks. Progression from MCI to dementia is common but often underdetected until significant decline has occurred. Functional decline serves as a proxy for cognitive decline, yet current assessments lack the ecological validity to capture real-world performance in instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs). This work investigates methods for detecting IADL subtasks as a foundation for longitudinal monitoring of cognitive and functional health. Methods: We developed an ecologically valid grocery shopping task in which 26 older adults (12 with MCI, 14 without), instrumented with inertial sensors, took part. Subtask detection was performed using an interpretable deep learning framework trained on pooled data. Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) were used to interpret detection performance across subtask categories. Results: Detection performance depended on subtask granularity: the framework excelled at identifying broad movement categories such as Walk and Turn but struggled with more granular subtasks, including discrete actions with ambiguous signatures and differentiating between similar subtasks like reaching to different heights. Model explanations revealed that detection errors were driven by overlapping motion signatures. Conclusion: SHAP analysis revealed that orientation angles, particularly yaw and roll dominated classification. The cognitively unimpaired and MCI groups differed in how these features were weighted, suggesting population-specific motor signatures that may serve as candidate digital biomarkers for early functional decline.
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.