A GPS-Based Framework for Understanding Outdoor Mobility Patterns of Older Adults with Dementia: An Exploratory Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: An active lifestyle may protect older adults from cognitive decline. Yet, due to the complex nature of outdoor environments, many people living with dementia experience decreased access to outdoor activities. In this context, conceptualizing and measuring outdoor mobility is of great significance. Using the global positioning system (GPS) provides an avenue for capturing the multi-dimensional nature of outdoor mobility. The objective of this study is to develop a comprehensive framework for comparing outdoor mobility patterns of cognitively intact older adults and older adults with dementia using passively collected GPS data. METHODS: A total of 7 people with dementia (PwD) and 8 cognitively intact controls (CTLs), aged 65 years or older, carried a GPS device when travelling outside their homes for 4 weeks. We applied a framework incorporating 12 GPS-based indicators to capture spatial, temporal, and semantic dimensions of outdoor mobility. RESULTS: Despite a small sample size, the application of our mobility framework identified several significant differences between the 2 groups. We found that PwD participated in more medical-related (Cliff's Delta = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.34-1) and fewer sport-related (Cliff's Delta = -0.78, 95% CI: -1 to -0.32) activities compared to the cognitively intact CTLs. Our results also suggested that longer duration of daily walking time (Cliff's Delta = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.148-1) and longer outdoor activities at night, after 8 p.m. (Hedges' g = 1.42, 95% CI: 0.85-1.09), are associated with cognitively intact individuals. CONCLUSION: Based on the proposed framework incorporating 12 GPS-based indicators, we were able to identify several differences in outdoor mobility in PwD compared with cognitively intact CTLs.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".