MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413155380 · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3598002

Cost-Efficient Fall Risk Assessment With Attention Augmented Vision Machine Learning on Sit-to-Stand Test Videos

2025· article· en· W4413155380 on OpenAlexaff
Chunhua Pan, Boting Qu, Rui Miao, Xin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceTest (biology)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningComputer visionHuman–computer interactionSimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Falls among the elderly and other at-risk populations pose a significant public health challenge, necessitating innovative methods to detect and intervene early. While automated fall risk assessment methods using wearable sensors or depth cameras have been proposed, the physical and psychological burden of wearing extra sensors, and the high cost of specialized equipment like Kinect, limits their practical adoption. To tackle this challenge, this paper presents a novel machine learning-based fall risk assessment approach calledFRAVM, which operates on Five times Sit-To-Stand (FSTS) test videos captured with standard, widely available cameras to identify individuals requiring fall prevention interventions. To enhance the practicality ofFRAVM, 3D pose estimation is applied to generate vision-rich 3D body keypoints, mitigating the challenges posed by restricted camera angles. Median-average filtering is used to reduce noise caused by video shaking and pose estimation inaccuracies, while a new Dynamic Time Warping (DTW)-based matching algorithm is designed to handle interference from irrelevant individuals appearing in the video. Furthermore, a novel Attention-augmented Spatial-Temporal Graph Convolutional Network (AST-GCN) is developed for reliably identifying the action in each frame, enabling accurate computation of key kinematic features for fall risk prediction. Experimental evaluations on a dataset of 450 FSTS test videos demonstrate the high performance ofFRAVM, with detection accuracy, F1 score, and ROC-AUC achieving 88.64%, 88.58%, and 98.86%, respectively. The ablation analysis confirms that the components inFRAVMare essential for achieving optimal results.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.395 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Access→Same topicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention→French-language works237,207→