Faller Classification in Older Adults Using Wearable Sensors Based on Turn and Straight-Walking Accelerometer-Based Features
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Faller classification in elderly populations can facilitate preventative care before a fall occurs. A novel wearable-sensor based faller classification method for the elderly was developed using accelerometer-based features from straight walking and turns. Seventy-six older individuals (74.15 ± 7.0 years), categorized as prospective fallers and non-fallers, completed a six-minute walk test with accelerometers attached to their lower legs and pelvis. After segmenting straight and turn sections, cross validation tests were conducted on straight and turn walking features to assess classification performance. The best "classifier model-feature selector" combination used turn data, random forest classifier, and select-5-best feature selector (73.4% accuracy, 60.5% sensitivity, 82.0% specificity, and 0.44 Matthew's Correlation Coefficient (MCC)). Using only the most frequently occurring features, a feature subset (minimum of anterior-posterior ratio of even/odd harmonics for right shank, standard deviation (SD) of anterior left shank acceleration SD, SD of mean anterior left shank acceleration, maximum of medial-lateral first quartile of Fourier transform (FQFFT) for lower back, maximum of anterior-posterior FQFFT for lower back) achieved better classification results, with 77.3% accuracy, 66.1% sensitivity, 84.7% specificity, and 0.52 MCC score. All classification performance metrics improved when turn data was used for faller classification, compared to straight walking data. Combining turn and straight walking features decreased performance metrics compared to turn features for similar classifier model-feature selector combinations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".