MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Development And Validation Of A Smartphone As An Accelerometer-based Physical Activity Monitor

2011· article· en· W2329125711 on OpenAlexaff
Meaghan M. Nolan, J. Ross Mitchell, Patricia K. Doyle–Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccelerometerEnergy expenditureTreadmillPhysical activityAccelerationActivity monitorPreferred walking speedMetabolic equivalentSimulationComputer scienceMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Physical activity (PA) is a complex behaviour that plays an important role in human health. Numerous subjective and objective methods are utilized to assess free-living PA behaviours with varying success, but accelerometer-based PA monitors, which estimate the rate of energy expenditure due to PA (PAEE) in kcal per minute or metabolic equivalents (METS), have become a tool of choice in these studies. The latest generation of smartphones possess triaxial accelerometers, and are now receiving attention as possible PA monitors. The many features of smartphones may allow researchers to collect objective PAEE data more easily and for longer periods of time, while decreasing participant burden. PURPOSE: To determine whether or not a smartphone could be used as an accelerometer-based PA monitor for walking and running. METHODS: A software application was developed for the smartphone, which enabled the device to collect acceleration data and email these data to the researcher. Twenty-five healthy adults (11 males, 14 females) walked and ran at various speeds (2.5-7.0mph) on a treadmill while acceleration data and criterion measurements of PAEE (METS) were collected. Using panel regressions, a model was developed that transformed variables calculated from the acceleration data into estimates of activity type (walking or running), speed (mph), and PAEE (METS). The variables included standard deviation (vertical), root mean square (medio-lateral), and vector counts per minute. Accuracy was assessed through comparison with known types, speeds, and criterion measurements of PAEE. RESULTS: The model accuracy in identifying activity type was 99.0%. Estimated walking speed had a mean error of 0.011mph (SDERROR = 0.353mph), and running speed had a mean error of -0.017mph (SDERROR = 0.639mph). Estimated PAEE of walking had a mean error of 0.339METS (SDERROR = 0.663METS), and running had a mean error of -0.434METS (SDERROR = 1.16METS). CONCLUSION: The results of this study indicate that a smartphone can be used as an accelerometer-based PA monitor for treadmill walking and running in healthy adults, providing estimates of PAEE with accuracies similar to those published for other devices. Further development of this technology may improve the research tools used in studies of free-living PA behaviours.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicPhysical Activity and Health→French-language works237,207→