Transitioning sleeping position detection in late pregnancy using computer vision from controlled to real-world settings: an observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective : To build a computer vision model that can automatically detect sleeping position in the third trimester under real-world conditions. Design : This study used data from an ongoing observational study and a previous cross-sectional study. Setting : Participants’ homes. Sample : Pregnant participants in the third trimester and their bed partners. Methods : Real-world overnight video recordings were collected from an ongoing, Canada-wide, prospective, four-night, home sleep apnea study and controlled-setting video recordings were used from a previous study. Images were extracted from the videos and body positions were annotated. Five-fold cross validation was used to train, validate, and test a model using state-of-the-art deep convolutional neural networks. Main Outcome Measures : Precision and recall of the model for detecting thirteen pre-defined body positions. Results : The dataset contained 39 pregnant participants, 13 bed partners, 12,930 images, and 47,001 annotations. The model was trained to detect pillows, twelve sleeping positions, and a sitting position in both the pregnant person and their bed partner simultaneously. The model significantly outperformed a previous similar model for the three most commonly occurring natural sleeping positions in pregnant and non-pregnant adults, with an 82-to-89% average probability of correctly detecting them and a 15-to-19% chance of failing to detect them when any one of them is present. Conclusions : The model holds potential to solve yet unanswered research and clinical questions regarding the relationship between sleeping position and pregnancy outcomes.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".