Machine Learning Groups Patients by Early Functional Improvement Likelihood Based on Wearable Sensor Instrumented Preoperative Timed-Up-and-Go Tests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Wearable sensors permit efficient data collection and unobtrusive systems can be used for instrumenting knee patients for objective assessment. Machine learning can be leveraged to parse the abundant information these systems provide and segment patients into relevant groups without specifying group membership criteria. The objective of this study is to examine functional parameters influencing favorable recovery outcomes by separating patients into functional groups and tracking them through clinical follow-ups. METHODS: Patients undergoing primary unilateral total knee arthroplasty (n = 68) completed instrumented timed-up-and-go tests preoperatively and at their 2-, 6-, and 12-week follow-up appointments. A custom wearable system extracted 55 metrics for analysis and a K-means algorithm separated patients into functionally distinguished groups based on the derived features. These groups were analyzed to determine which metrics differentiated most and how each cluster improved during early recovery. RESULTS: Patients separated into 2 clusters (n = 46 and n = 22) with significantly different test completion times (12.6 s vs 21.6 s, P < .001). Tracking the recovery of both groups to their 12-week follow-ups revealed 64% of one group improved their function while 63% of the other maintained preoperative function. The higher improvement group shortened their test times by 4.94 s, (P = .005) showing faster recovery while the other group did not improve above a minimally important clinical difference (0.87 s, P = .07). Features with the largest effect size between groups were distinguished as important functional parameters. CONCLUSION: This work supports using wearable sensors to instrument functional tests during clinical visits and using machine learning to parse complex patterns to reveal clinically relevant parameters.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".