Towards a novel set of GPS‐derived metrics to identify the differences between mobility patterns of cognitively intact older adults and older adults with dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Maintaining an active lifestyle and participating in social activities are key components of healthy ageing. These components rely on the individuals’ ability to remain mobile out of home. The global positioning system (GPS) is increasingly used to assess outdoor mobility of older adults. However, there is a gap in establishing a framework that recognizes the differences between mobility patterns of cognitively intact older adults and older adults with dementia (OAwD). We propose a set of GPS‐derived metrics to identify these differences, which can be used to evaluate changes in mobility patterns of OAwD over time. Method We analyzed the mobility profiles of 15 older adults from the greater Toronto area using GPS technology. Participants were aged between 65 and 90 years (M=74.9, SD=7.05) and were either cognitively healthy (n = 8) or diagnosed with dementia (n = 7). First, we created GPS‐based features representing different dimensions of outdoor mobility. These features include (1) the typical distance covered by individuals, (2) randomness of the travel patterns, (3) the spatial variation of the GPS locations, (4) the number of distinct stops visited per day, (5) the number of daily trips away from home, (6) the score of three levels of outdoor life‐space, and (7) the maximum distance travelled from home. Then, we used Recursive Feature Elimination (RFE) with Random Forest (RF) to select the most important mobility features with respect to cognitive status. Result A total of 55,580 GPS points were collected by the 15 unique participants over a period of 4 to 8 weeks. The RFE method indicated that features (1), (2), (3), and (5) had the strongest association with cognitive status. Our results suggested that OAwD displayed more predictability (i.e. smaller randomness) in travel patterns compared to the controls (OAwD: M=4.82, SD=0.57 vs. CTL: M=5.62, SD=0.71). Furthermore, the OAwD made fewer daily out‐of‐home trips compared to the controls (OAwD: M=1.06, SD=0.79 vs. CTL: M=1.65, SD=0.45), and covered smaller distances compared to the controls (OAwD: M=12.27, SD=11.73 km vs. CTL: M=15.78, SD=24.31 km). Conclusion The proposed set of GPS‐based features identified the differences between mobility patterns of cognitively intact older adults and OAwD.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".