Literature DB >> 25340659

A comparison of activity classification in younger and older cohorts using a smartphone.

Michael B Del Rosario1, Kejia Wang, Jingjing Wang, Ying Liu, Matthew Brodie, Kim Delbaere, Nigel H Lovell, Stephen R Lord, Stephen J Redmond.   

Abstract

Automatic recognition of human activity is useful as a means of estimating energy expenditure and has potential for use in fall detection and prediction. The emergence of the smartphone as a ubiquitous device presents an opportunity to utilize its embedded sensors, computational power and data connectivity as a platform for continuous health monitoring. In the study described herein, 37 older people (83.9  ±  3.4 years) performed a series of activities of daily living (ADLs) while a smartphone (containing a triaxial accelerometer, triaxial gyroscope and barometric pressure sensor) was placed in the front pocket of their trousers. These results are compared to a similar trial conducted previously in which 20 young people (21.9  ±  1.65 years) were asked to perform the same ADLs using the same smartphone (again in the front pocket of their trousers).In each trial, the participants were asked to perform several activities (standing, sitting, lying, walking on level ground, up and down staircases, and riding an elevator up and down) in a free-living environment. During each acquisition session, the internal sensor signals were recorded and subsequently used to develop activity classifiers based on a decision tree algorithm that classified ADL in epochs of ~1.25 s. When training and testing with the younger cohort, using a leave-one-out cross validation procedure, a total classification sensitivity of 80.9% ± 9.57% ([Formula: see text] = 0.75  ±  0.12) was obtained. Retraining and testing on the older cohort, again using cross validation, gives a comparable total class sensitivity of 82.0% ± 8.88% ([Formula: see text] =0.74  ±  0.12).When trained with the younger group and tested on the older group, a total class sensitivity of 69.2% ± 24.8% (95% confidence interval [69.6%, 70.6%]) and [Formula: see text] = 0.60  ±  0.27 (95% confidence interval [0.58, 0.59]) was obtained. When trained on the older group and tested on the younger group, a total class sensitivity of 80.5% ± 6.80% (95% confidence interval [79.0%, 80.6%]) and [Formula: see text] = 0.74  ±  0.08 (95% confidence interval [0.73, 0.75]) was obtained.An instance of the decision tree classifier developed was implemented on the smartphone as a software application. It was capable of performing real-time activity classification for a period of 17 h on a single battery charge, illustrating that smartphone technology provides a viable platform on which to perform long-term activity monitoring.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25340659     DOI: 10.1088/0967-3334/35/11/2269

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Physiol Meas        ISSN: 0967-3334            Impact factor:   2.833


  18 in total

1.  Wearable pendant device monitoring using new wavelet-based methods shows daily life and laboratory gaits are different.

Authors:  Matthew A D Brodie; Milou J M Coppens; Stephen R Lord; Nigel H Lovell; Yves J Gschwind; Stephen J Redmond; Michael Benjamin Del Rosario; Kejia Wang; Daina L Sturnieks; Michela Persiani; Kim Delbaere
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2015-08-06       Impact factor: 2.602

2.  Activity Recognition in Youth Using Single Accelerometer Placed at Wrist or Ankle.

Authors:  Andrea Mannini; Mary Rosenberger; William L Haskell; Angelo M Sabatini; Stephen S Intille
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 5.411

3.  Feature selection for wearable smartphone-based human activity recognition with able bodied, elderly, and stroke patients.

Authors:  Nicole A Capela; Edward D Lemaire; Natalie Baddour
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-04-17       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Performance Evaluation of State of the Art Systems for Physical Activity Classification of Older Subjects Using Inertial Sensors in a Real Life Scenario: A Benchmark Study.

Authors:  Muhammad Awais; Luca Palmerini; Alan K Bourke; Espen A F Ihlen; Jorunn L Helbostad; Lorenzo Chiari
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2016-12-11       Impact factor: 3.576

5.  Activity Recognition in Individuals Walking With Assistive Devices: The Benefits of Device-Specific Models.

Authors:  Luca Lonini; Aakash Gupta; Susan Deems-Dluhy; Shenan Hoppe-Ludwig; Konrad Kording; Arun Jayaraman
Journal:  JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol       Date:  2017-08-10

6.  Activity Recognition for Persons With Stroke Using Mobile Phone Technology: Toward Improved Performance in a Home Setting.

Authors:  Megan K O'Brien; Nicholas Shawen; Chaithanya K Mummidisetty; Saninder Kaur; Xiao Bo; Christian Poellabauer; Konrad Kording; Arun Jayaraman
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2017-05-25       Impact factor: 5.428

7.  Auto detection and segmentation of daily living activities during a Timed Up and Go task in people with Parkinson's disease using multiple inertial sensors.

Authors:  Hung Nguyen; Karina Lebel; Patrick Boissy; Sarah Bogard; Etienne Goubault; Christian Duval
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2017-04-07       Impact factor: 4.262

Review 8.  Tracking the Evolution of Smartphone Sensing for Monitoring Human Movement.

Authors:  Michael B del Rosario; Stephen J Redmond; Nigel H Lovell
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2015-07-31       Impact factor: 3.576

9.  Evaluation of a smartphone human activity recognition application with able-bodied and stroke participants.

Authors:  N A Capela; E D Lemaire; N Baddour; M Rudolf; N Goljar; H Burger
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2016-01-20       Impact factor: 4.262

10.  Double-Windows-Based Motion Recognition in Multi-Floor Buildings Assisted by a Built-In Barometer.

Authors:  Maolin Liu; Huaiyu Li; Yuan Wang; Fei Li; Xiuwan Chen
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2018-04-01       Impact factor: 3.576

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.