MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388014509 · doi:10.2196/47167

Continuous Assessment of Function and Disability via Mobile Sensing: Real-World Data-Driven Feasibility Study

2023· article· en· W4388014509 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Emese Sükei, Lorena Romero-Medrano, Santiago de León-Martínez, Jesús Herrera López, Juan José Campaña-Montes, Pablo M. Olmos, Enrique Baca‐García, Antonio Artés-Rodrı́guez

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónEuropean CommissionMinisterio de Ciencia, Innovación y UniversidadesComunidad de Madrid
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceMachine learningComputer scienceFeature (linguistics)Domain (mathematical analysis)MedicineStatisticsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Functional limitations are associated with poor clinical outcomes, higher mortality, and disability rates, especially in older adults. Continuous assessment of patients' functionality is important for clinical practice; however, traditional questionnaire-based assessment methods are very time-consuming and infrequently used. Mobile sensing offers a great range of sources that can assess function and disability daily. OBJECTIVE: This work aims to prove the feasibility of an interpretable machine learning pipeline for predicting function and disability based on the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 outcomes of clinical outpatients, using passively collected digital biomarkers. METHODS: One-month-long behavioral time-series data consisting of physical and digital activity descriptor variables were summarized using statistical measures (minimum, maximum, mean, median, SD, and IQR), creating 64 features that were used for prediction. We then applied a sequential feature selection to each WHODAS 2.0 domain (cognition, mobility, self-care, getting along, life activities, and participation) in order to find the most descriptive features for each domain. Finally, we predicted the WHODAS 2.0 functional domain scores using linear regression using the best feature subsets. We reported the mean absolute errors and the mean absolute percentage errors over 4 folds as goodness-of-fit statistics to evaluate the model and allow for between-domain performance comparison. RESULTS: Our machine learning-based models for predicting patients' WHODAS functionality scores per domain achieved an average (across the 6 domains) mean absolute percentage error of 19.5%, varying between 14.86% (self-care domain) and 27.21% (life activities domain). We found that 5-19 features were sufficient for each domain, and the most relevant being the distance traveled, time spent at home, time spent walking, exercise time, and vehicle time. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show the feasibility of using machine learning-based methods to assess functional health solely from passively sensed mobile data. The feature selection step provides a set of interpretable features for each domain, ensuring better explainability to the models' decisions-an important aspect in clinical practice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.176
GPT teacher head0.544
Teacher spread0.368 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention→French-language works237,207→