MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391067767 · doi:10.1093/ptj/pzad176

Application of Artificial Intelligence in Infant Movement Classification: A Reliability and Validity Study in Infants Who Were Full-Term and Preterm

2024· article· en· W4391067767 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shiang-Chin Lin, Erick Chandra, Po‐Nien Tsao, Wei‐Chih Liao, Wei J. Chen, Ting‐An Yen, Jane Yung-jen Hsu, Suh‐Fang Jeng

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Therapy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Taiwan UniversityNational Taiwan University HospitalNational Science and Technology Council
KeywordsMovement assessmentArtificial intelligenceMovement (music)Computer scienceMachine learningReliability (semiconductor)RecallPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMotor skillPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicineCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Preterm infants are at high risk of neuromotor disorders. Recent advances in digital technology and machine learning algorithms have enabled the tracking and recognition of anatomical key points of the human body. It remains unclear whether the proposed pose estimation model and the skeleton-based action recognition model for adult movement classification are applicable and accurate for infant motor assessment. Therefore, this study aimed to develop and validate an artificial intelligence (AI) model framework for movement recognition in full-term and preterm infants. METHODS: This observational study prospectively assessed 30 full-term infants and 54 preterm infants using the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (58 movements) from 4 to 18 months of age with their movements recorded by 5 video cameras simultaneously in a standardized clinical setup. The movement videos were annotated for the start/end times and presence of movements by 3 pediatric physical therapists. The annotated videos were used for the development and testing of an AI algorithm that consisted of a 17-point human pose estimation model and a skeleton-based action recognition model. RESULTS: The infants contributed 153 sessions of Alberta Infant Motor Scale assessment that yielded 13,139 videos of movements for data processing. The intra and interrater reliabilities for movement annotation of videos by the therapists showed high agreements (88%-100%). Thirty-one of the 58 movements were selected for machine learning because of sufficient data samples and developmental significance. Using the annotated results as the standards, the AI algorithm showed satisfactory agreement in classifying the 31 movements (accuracy = 0.91, recall = 0.91, precision = 0.91, and F1 score = 0.91). CONCLUSION: The AI algorithm was accurate in classifying 31 movements in full-term and preterm infants from 4 to 18 months of age in a standardized clinical setup. IMPACT: The findings provide the basis for future refinement and validation of the algorithm on home videos to be a remote infant movement assessment.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.352
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical TherapySame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207