ArticlePloS one2024
Development of a multi-wear-site, deep learning-based physical activity intensity classification algorithm using raw acceleration data.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine and Deep Learning for Detection of Moderate-to-Vigorous Physical Activity From Accelerometer Data: Systematic Scoping Review.Interactive journal of medical research · 2026Review
- ViT-BiLSTM Multimodal Learning for Paediatric ADHD Recognition: Integrating Wearable Sensor Data with Clinical Profiles.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Deep learning based multi attribute evaluation for holistic student assessment in physical education.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A novel ViT-BILSTM model for physical activity intensity classification in adults using gravity-based acceleration.BMC biomedical engineering · 2025Article
- Predicting physical functioning status in older adults: insights from wrist accelerometer sensors and derived digital biomarkers of physical activity.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccelerometers are widely adopted in research and consumer devices as a tool to measure physical activity. However, existing algorithms used to estimate activity intensity are wear-site-specific. Non-compliance to wear instructions may lead to misspecifications. In this study, we developed deep neural network models to classify device placement and activity intensity based on raw acceleration data. Performances of these models were evaluated by making comparisons to the ground truth and results derived from existing count-based algorithms.
methods54 participants (26 adults 26.9±8.7 years; 28 children, 12.1±2.3 years) completed a series of activity tasks in a laboratory with accelerometers attached to each of their hip, wrist, and chest. Their metabolic rates at rest and during activity periods were measured using the portable COSMED K5; data were then converted to metabolic equivalents, and used as the ground truth for activity intensity. Deep neutral networks using the Long Short-Term Memory approach were trained and evaluated based on raw acceleration data collected from accelerometers. Models to classify wear-site and activity intensity, respectively, were evaluated.
resultsThe trained models correctly classified wear-sites and activity intensities over 90% of the time, which outperformed count-based algorithms (wear-site correctly specified: 83% to 85%; wear-site misspecified: 64% to 75%). When additional parameters of age, height and weight of participants were specified, the accuracy of some prediction models surpassed 95%.
conclusionsResults of the study suggest that accelerometer placement could be determined prospectively, and non-wear-site-specific algorithms had satisfactory accuracies. The performances, in terms of intensity classification, of these models also exceeded typical count-based algorithms. Without being restricted to one specific wear-site, research protocols for accelerometers wear could allow more autonomy to participants, which may in turn improve their acceptance and compliance to wear protocols, and in turn more accurate results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.