| Literature DB >> 27454608 |
Oresti Banos1, Muhammad Bilal Amin1, Wajahat Ali Khan1, Muhammad Afzal1, Maqbool Hussain1, Byeong Ho Kang2, Sungyong Lee3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The provision of health and wellness care is undergoing an enormous transformation. A key element of this revolution consists in prioritizing prevention and proactivity based on the analysis of people's conducts and the empowerment of individuals in their self-management. Digital technologies are unquestionably destined to be the main engine of this change, with an increasing number of domain-specific applications and devices commercialized every year; however, there is an apparent lack of frameworks capable of orchestrating and intelligently leveraging, all the data, information and knowledge generated through these systems.Entities:
Keywords: Big data; Cloud computing; Context-awareness; Digital health; Human behavior; Knowledge bases; Quantified self; User experience; Wearable sensors; dHealth framework
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27454608 PMCID: PMC4959395 DOI: 10.1186/s12938-016-0179-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Eng Online ISSN: 1475-925X Impact factor: 2.819
Fig. 1Mining Minds framework architecture and operational diagram
Fig. 2Mining Minds health and wellness service scenario
Fig. 3Personalized weight management app
Fig. 4Physical lifestyle coaching app
Fig. 5Behavior inspection tool
Fig. 6Rule authoring tool
Accuracy of the data curation process
| No. of service calls | No. of missed data packets | Packet loss error (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 30,000 | 6 | 0.02 |
| 60,000 | 22 | 0.04 |
| 90,000 | 39 | 0.04 |
| 120,000 | 55 | 0.05 |
| 150,000 | 96 | 0.06 |
| 180,000 | 308 | 0.17 |
| Average | 0.06 |
Performance of the data persistence process for different operation runs
| Run duration (h) | 2 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 10 | 12 | 14 | 16 | 18 | 20 | 22 | 24 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Performance (avg data writes/s) | 2.20 | 2.21 | 2.20 | 2.20 | 2.10 | 2.21 | 2.21 | 2.21 | 2.20 | 2.20 | 2.20 | 2.20 |
Activity recognition performance when operating on the smartphone data
| Activity | SE | SP | PPV | NPV | F-score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eating | 0.87 | 0.99 | 0.86 | 0.99 | 0.86 |
| Running | 0.97 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.99 |
| Sitting | 0.94 | 0.98 | 0.93 | 0.98 | 0.94 |
| Standing | 0.88 | 0.99 | 0.95 | 0.98 | 0.91 |
| Walking | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.98 | 1.00 | 0.99 |
| Jogging | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.98 | 1.00 | 0.99 |
| Stretching | 0.96 | 0.99 | 0.91 | 1.00 | 0.93 |
| Sweeping | 0.93 | 0.99 | 0.90 | 0.99 | 0.91 |
| Lying down | 0.84 | 1.00 | 0.92 | 0.99 | 0.88 |
Each metric correspond to SE sensitivity, SP specificity, PPV positive predictive value, NPV, negative predictive value and F-score
Activity recognition performance when operating on the smartwatch data
| Activity | SE | SP | PPV | NPV | F-score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eating | 0.82 | 0.99 | 0.86 | 0.99 | 0.84 |
| Running | 0.96 | 1.00 | 0.94 | 1.00 | 0.95 |
| Sitting | 0.93 | 0.94 | 0.85 | 0.97 | 0.89 |
| Standing | 0.85 | 0.99 | 0.94 | 0.97 | 0.90 |
| Walking | 0.96 | 0.98 | 0.95 | 0.98 | 0.96 |
| Jogging | 0.92 | 1.00 | 0.97 | 1.00 | 0.95 |
| Stretching | 0.93 | 1.00 | 0.97 | 0.99 | 0.95 |
| Sweeping | 0.95 | 1.00 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.97 |
| Lying down | 0.85 | 1.00 | 0.93 | 0.99 | 0.89 |
Each metric correspond to SE sensitivity, SP specificity, PPV positive predictive value, NPV negative predictive value and F-score
Activity recognition performance when operating on both smartphone and smartwatch data
| Activity | SE | SP | PPV | NPV | F-score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eating | 0.89 | 1.00 | 0.88 | 1.00 | 0.88 |
| Running | 0.97 | 1.00 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.98 |
| Sitting | 0.95 | 0.98 | 0.94 | 0.98 | 0.95 |
| Standing | 0.91 | 0.99 | 0.95 | 0.98 | 0.93 |
| Walking | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.98 | 1.00 | 0.99 |
| Jogging | 0.98 | 1.00 | 0.98 | 1.00 | 0.98 |
| Stretching | 0.97 | 0.99 | 0.92 | 1.00 | 0.94 |
| Sweeping | 0.94 | 1.00 | 0.94 | 1.00 | 0.94 |
| Lying down | 0.90 | 1.00 | 0.93 | 1.00 | 0.92 |
Each metric correspond to SE sensitivity, SP specificity, PPV positive predictive value, NPV negative predictive value and F-score
Average user response time (in minutes) to recommendations
| User | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Avg response time | 24.47 | 34.44 | 3.42 | 5.38 | 40.44 | 7.21 | 28.29 | 13.99 | 8.56 | 36.84 |