A model for presenting accelerometer paradata in large studies: ISCOLE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a model for reporting accelerometer paradata (process-related data produced from survey administration) collected in the International Study of Childhood Obesity Lifestyle and the Environment (ISCOLE), a multi-national investigation of >7000 children (averaging 10.5 years of age) sampled from 12 different developed and developing countries and five continents. ISCOLE employed a 24-hr waist worn 7-day protocol using the ActiGraph GT3X+. Checklists, flow charts, and systematic data queries documented accelerometer paradata from enrollment to data collection and treatment. Paradata included counts of consented and eligible participants, accelerometers distributed for initial and additional monitoring (site specific decisions in the face of initial monitoring failure), inadequate data (e.g., lost/malfunction, insufficient wear time), and averages for waking wear time, valid days of data, participants with valid data (≥4 valid days of data, including 1 weekend day), and minutes with implausibly high values (≥20,000 activity counts/min). Of 7806 consented participants, 7372 were deemed eligible to participate, 7314 accelerometers were distributed for initial monitoring and another 106 for additional monitoring. 414 accelerometer data files were inadequate (primarily due to insufficient wear time). Only 29 accelerometers were lost during the implementation of ISCOLE worldwide. The final locked data file consisted of 6553 participant files (90.0% relative to number of participants who completed monitoring) with valid waking wear time, averaging 6.5 valid days and 888.4 minutes/day (14.8 hours). We documented 4762 minutes with implausibly high activity count values from 695 unique participants (9.4% of eligible participants and <0.01% of all minutes). Detailed accelerometer paradata is useful for standardizing communication, facilitating study management, improving the representative qualities of surveys, tracking study endpoint attainment, comparing studies, and ultimately anticipating and controlling costs. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01722500
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 | 0.302 | 0.522 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.019 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.009 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".