MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159732131 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v4n3p98

Can an Accelerometer-Based Monitor be used to Accurately Assess Physical Activity in a Population of Survivors of Critical Illness?

2012· article· en· W2159732131 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lara Edbrooke, Noel Lythgo, Unna Raquel Goldsworthy, Linda Denehy

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGaitTreadmillReliability (semiconductor)AccelerometerMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationIntensive care unitPopulationGait analysisActivity monitorPhysical therapyPhysical activityInternal medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To investigate the validity and reliability of the Activity Monitoring Pod (AMP331) to record gait parameters in healthy young adults (YA) and intensive care unit inpatients (ICU). METHODS: Fifteen YA completed a series of over-ground walks. Another 15 YA completed a series of treadmill walks. The ICU group (N=20) completed a series of over-ground walks with repeat trials. Gait parameters were recorded simultaneously for each walk. RESULTS: For the YA over-ground condition, no significant differences were found between the measures recorded by the systems. For the YA treadmill condition, 43% of the measures differed (P < .05). For the ICU group, the AMP331 underestimated distance and speed by 3m and 25cm/s respectively. Reliability measures for distance (ICC 0.99, 95%CI 0.98 - 0.99) and step count (ICC 0.99, 95%CI 0.99 - 1.00) were excellent. CONCLUSIONS: The AMP 331 is a valid instrument for recording basic gait parameters for over-ground walking in healthy YA and ICU survivors.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.676

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.170
GPT teacher head0.504
Teacher spread0.334 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207