Internal Consistency of Sway Measures via Embedded Head-Mounted Accelerometers: Implications for Neuromotor Investigations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accelerometers are being increasingly incorporated into neuroimaging devices to enable real-time filtering of movement artifacts. In this study, we evaluate the reliability of sway metrics derived from these accelerometers in a standard eyes-open balance assessment to determine their utility in multimodal study designs. Ten participants equipped with a head-mounted accelerometer performed an eyes-open standing condition on 7 consecutive days. Sway performance was quantified with 4 standard metrics: root-mean-square (RMS) acceleration, peak-to-peak (P2P) acceleration, jerk, and ellipse area. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) quantified reliability. P2P in both the mediolateral (ICC = 0.65) and anteroposterior (ICC = 0.67) planes yielded the poorest reliability. Both ellipse area and RMS exhibited good reliability, ranging from 0.76 to 0.84 depending on the plane. Finally, jerk displayed the highest reliability with an ICC value of 0.95. Moderate to excellent reliability was observed in all sway metrics. These findings demonstrate that head-mounted accelerometers, commonly found in neuroimaging devices, can be used to reliably assess sway. These data validate the use of head-mounted accelerometers in the assessment of motor control alongside other measures of brain activity such as electroencephalography (EEG) and functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS).
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 | 0.063 | 0.136 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".