ArticleSpinal cord2024
Preliminary field validity of ActiGraph-based energy expenditure estimation in wheelchair users with spinal cord injury.
Article in Spinal cord, 2024. 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
STUDY
designCross-sectional validation study.
objectivesTo develop a raw acceleration signal-based random forest (RF) model for predicting total energy expenditure (TEE) in manual wheelchair users (MWUs) and evaluate the preliminary field validity of this new model, along with four existing models published in prior literature, using the Doubly Labeled Water (DLW) method.
settingGeneral community and research institution in Pittsburgh, USA.
methodsA total of 78 participants' data from two previous studies were used to develop the new RF model. A seven-day cross-sectional study was conducted to collect participants' free-living physical activity and TEE data, resting metabolic rate, demographics, and anthropometrics. Ten MWUs with spinal cord injury (SCI) completed the study, with seven participants having valid data for evaluating the preliminary field validity of the five models.
resultsThe RF model achieved a mean absolute error (MAE) of 0.59 ± 0.60 kcal/min and a mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) of 23.6% ± 24.3% on the validation set. For preliminary field validation, the five assessed models yielded MAE from 136 kcal/day to 1141 kcal/day and MAPE from 6.1% to 50.2%. The model developed by Nightingale et al. in 2015 achieved the best performance (MAE: 136 ± 96 kcal/day, MAPE: 6.1% ± 4.7%), while the RF model achieved comparable performance (MAE: 167 ± 99 kcal/day, MAPE: 7.4% ± 5.1%).
conclusionsTwo existing models and our newly developed RF model showed good preliminary field validity for assessing TEE in MWUs with SCI and the potential to detect lifestyle change in this population. Future large-scale field validation studies and model iteration are recommended.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38969742What 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.