ArticleScientific reports2026
Exploring the Impact of Physical Activity Metrics on Calorie Consumption: A Machine Learning Approach Combined with SHAP Analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rising global obesity necessitates precise, personalized management of energy balance. While machine learning effectively handles complex physiological data, traditional “black-box” models lack the transparency needed to understand how specific behaviors impact metabolic outcomes. This opacity limits trust and the practical utility of these models in guiding actionable health interventions. To address this challenge, this study evaluates the effectiveness of activity features in predicting energy expenditure using four distinct machine learning paradigms: Support Vector Regression (SVR), Random Forest (RF), XGBoost, and Radial Basis Function Neural Network (RBFNN). These models were selected to compare performance across different algorithmic mechanisms (kernel-based, ensemble, and neural networks) on highly correlated datasets. Furthermore, SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) analysis was integrated to visualize feature contributions and resolve the interpretability issue. Comparative analysis revealed that SVR demonstrated the strongest generalization ability, achieving an R2 of 0.78 on the test set, whereas XGBoost, despite superior training performance, suffered from overfitting. SHAP analysis identified “Total Distance” and “Total Steps” as the most critical predictive features. Crucially, the results highlighted that “Very Active Minutes” significantly amplifies energy expenditure, whereas light activity and sedentary behavior contribute minimally. This study validates the robustness of SVR for small-scale, physiological datasets and demonstrates that integrating SHAP enhances model transparency8. These findings provide a data-driven theoretical foundation for optimizing exercise plans, suggesting that personalized health interventions should prioritize increasing the intensity and distance of physical activity to maximize health outcomes.
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.