Dataset Information

Identifying bedrest using 24-h waist or wrist accelerometry in adults.

ABSTRACT: Objectives: To adapt and refine a previously-developed youth-specific algorithm to identify bedrest for use in adults. The algorithm is based on using an automated decision tree (DT) analysis of accelerometry data.

Design: Healthy adults (n = 141, 85 females, 19-69 years-old) wore accelerometers on the waist, with a subset also wearing accelerometers on the dominant wrist (n = 45). Participants spent ?24-h in a whole-room indirect calorimeter equipped with a force-platform floor to detect movement.

Methods: Minute-by-minute data from recordings of waist-worn or wrist-worn accelerometers were used to identify bedrest and wake periods. Participants were randomly allocated to development (n = 69 and 23) and validation (n = 72 and 22) groups for waist-worn and wrist-worn accelerometers, respectively. The optimized DT algorithm parameters were block length, threshold, bedrest-start trigger, and bedrest-end trigger. Differences between DT classification and synchronized objective classification by the room calorimeter to bedrest or wake were assessed for sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy using a Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) procedure applied to 1-min epochs (n = 92,543 waist; n = 30,653 wrist).

Results: The optimal algorithm parameter values for block length were 60 and 45 min, thresholds 12.5 and 400 counts/min, bedrest-start trigger 120 and 400 counts/min, and bedrest-end trigger 1,200 and 1,500 counts/min, for the waist and wrist-worn accelerometers, respectively. Bedrest was identified correctly in the validation group with sensitivities of 0.819 and 0.912, specificities of 0.966 and 0.923, and accuracies of 0.755 and 0.859 by the waist and wrist-worn accelerometer, respectively. The DT algorithm identified bedrest/sleep with greater accuracy than a commonly used automated algorithm (Cole-Kripke) for wrist-worn accelerometers (p<0.001).

Conclusions: The adapted DT accurately identifies bedrest in data from accelerometers worn by adults on either the wrist or waist. The automated bedrest/sleep detection DT algorithm for both youth and adults is openly accessible as a package "PhysActBedRest" for the R-computer language.

SUBMITTER: Tracy JD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5865746 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Identifying bedrest using 24-h waist or wrist accelerometry in adults.

Tracy J Dustin JD Acra Sari S Chen Kong Y KY Buchowski Maciej S MS

PloS one 20180323 3

<h4>Objectives</h4>To adapt and refine a previously-developed youth-specific algorithm to identify bedrest for use in adults. The algorithm is based on using an automated decision tree (DT) analysis of accelerometry data.<h4>Design</h4>Healthy adults (n = 141, 85 females, 19-69 years-old) wore accelerometers on the waist, with a subset also wearing accelerometers on the dominant wrist (n = 45). Participants spent ≈24-h in a whole-room indirect calorimeter equipped with a force-platform floor to ...[more]

PMID: 29570740

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo adapt and validate a previously developed decision tree for youth to identify bedrest for use in preschool children.MethodsParents of healthy preschool (3-6-year-old) children (n = 610; 294 males) were asked to help them to wear an accelerometer for 7 to 10 days and 24 hours/day on their waist. Children with ≥3 nights of valid recordings were randomly allocated to the development (n = 200) and validation (n = 200) groups. Wear periods from accelerometer recordings were identified minute-by-minute as bedrest or wake using visual identification by two independent raters. To automate visual identification, chosen decision tree (DT) parameters (block length, threshold, bedrest-start trigger, and bedrest-end trigger) were optimized in the development group using a Nelder-Mead simplex optimization method, which maximized the accuracy of DT-identified bedrest in 1-min epochs against synchronized visually identified bedrest (n = 4,730,734). DT's performance with optimized parameters was compared with the visual identification, commonly used Sadeh's sleep detection algorithm, DT for youth (10-18-years-old), and parental survey of sleep duration in the validation group.ResultsOn average, children wore an accelerometer for 8.3 days and 20.8 hours/day. Comparing the DT-identified bedrest with visual identification in the validation group yielded sensitivity = 0.941, specificity = 0.974, and accuracy = 0.956. The optimal block length was 36 min, the threshold 230 counts/min, the bedrest-start trigger 305 counts/min, and the bedrest-end trigger 1,129 counts/min. In the validation group, DT identified bedrest with greater accuracy than Sadeh's algorithm (0.956 and 0.902) and DT for youth (0.956 and 0.861) (both P<0.001). Both DT (564±77 min/day) and Sadeh's algorithm (604±80 min/day) identified significantly less bedrest/sleep than parental survey (650±81 min/day) (both P<0.001).ConclusionsThe DT-based algorithm initially developed for youth was adapted for preschool children to identify time spent in bedrest with high accuracy. The DT is available as a package for the R open-source software environment ("PhysActBedRest").

Project description:Sufficient physical activity (PA) reduces the risk of a myriad of diseases and preserves physical capabilities in later life. While there have been significant achievements in mapping accelerations to real-life movements using machine learning (ML), errors continue to be common, particularly for wrist-worn devices. It remains unknown whether ML models are robust for estimating age-related loss of physical function. In this study, we evaluated the performance of ML models (XGBoost and LASSO) to estimate the hallmark measures of PA in low physical performance (LPP) and high physical performance (HPP) groups. Our models were built to recognize PA types and intensities, identify each individual activity, and estimate energy expenditure (EE) using wrist-worn accelerometer data (33 activities per participant) from a large sample of participants (n = 247, 57% females, aged 60+ years). Results indicated that the ML models were accurate in recognizing PA by type and intensity while also estimating EE accurately. However, the models built to recognize individual activities were less robust. Across all tasks, XGBoost outperformed LASSO. XGBoost obtained F1-Scores for sedentary (0.932 ± 0.005), locomotion (0.946 ± 0.003), lifestyle (0.927 ± 0.006), and strength flexibility exercise (0.915 ± 0.017) activity type recognition tasks. The F1-Scores for recognizing low, light, and moderate activity intensity were (0.932&nbsp;±&nbsp;0.005), (0.840 ± 0.004), and (0.869 ± 0.005), respectively. The root mean square error for EE estimation was 0.836 ± 0.059 METs. There was no evidence showing that splitting the participants into the LPP and HPP groups improved the models' performance on estimating the hallmark measures of physical activities. In conclusion, using features derived from wrist-worn accelerometer data, machine learning models can accurately recognize PA types and intensities and estimate EE for older adults with high and low physical function.

Project description:BackgroundMany large studies have implemented wrist or thigh accelerometry to capture physical activity, but the accuracy of these measurements to infer activity energy expenditure (AEE) and consequently total energy expenditure (TEE) has not been demonstrated. The purpose of this study was to assess the validity of acceleration intensity at wrist and thigh sites as estimates of AEE and TEE under free-living conditions using a gold-standard criterion.MethodsMeasurements for 193 UK adults (105 men, 88 women, aged 40-66 years, BMI 20.4-36.6 kg m-2) were collected with triaxial accelerometers worn on the dominant wrist, non-dominant wrist and thigh in free-living conditions for 9-14 days. In a subsample (50 men, 50 women) TEE was simultaneously assessed with doubly labelled water (DLW). AEE was estimated from non-dominant wrist using an established estimation model, and novel models were derived for dominant wrist and thigh in the non-DLW subsample. Agreement with both AEE and TEE from DLW was evaluated by mean bias, root mean squared error (RMSE), and Pearson correlation.ResultsMean TEE and AEE derived from DLW were 11.6 (2.3) MJ day-1 and 49.8 (16.3) kJ day-1 kg-1. Dominant and non-dominant wrist acceleration were highly correlated in free-living (r = 0.93), but less so with thigh (r = 0.73 and 0.66, respectively). Estimates of AEE were 48.6 (11.8) kJ day-1 kg-1 from dominant wrist, 48.6 (12.3) from non-dominant wrist, and 46.0 (10.1) from thigh; these agreed strongly with AEE (RMSE ~12.2 kJ day-1 kg-1, r ~ 0.71) with small mean biases at the population level (~6%). Only the thigh estimate was statistically significantly different from the criterion. When combining these AEE estimates with estimated REE, agreement was stronger with the criterion (RMSE ~1.0 MJ day-1, r ~ 0.90).ConclusionsIn UK adults, acceleration measured at either wrist or thigh can be used to estimate population levels of AEE and TEE in free-living conditions with high precision.

Project description:PurposeThis study aimed to apply open-source analysis code to raw habitual physical activity data from wrist-worn monitors to: 1) objectively, unobtrusively, and accurately discriminate between "running" and "nonrunning" days; and 2) develop and compare simple accelerometer-derived metrics of external training load with existing self-report measures.MethodsSeven-day wrist-worn accelerometer (GENEActiv; Activinsights Ltd, Kimbolton, UK) data obtained from 35 experienced runners (age, 41.9 ± 11.4 yr; height, 1.72 ± 0.08 m; mass, 68.5 ± 9.7 kg; body mass index, 23.2 ± 2.2 kg·m; 19 [54%] women) every other week over 9 to 18 wk were date-matched with self-reported training log data. Receiver operating characteristic analyses were applied to accelerometer metrics ("Average Acceleration," "Most Active-30mins," "Mins≥400 mg") to discriminate between "running" and "nonrunning" days and cross-validated (leave one out cross-validation). Variance explained in training log criterion metrics (miles, duration, training load) by accelerometer metrics (Mins≥400 mg, "workload (WL) 400-4000 mg") was examined using linear regression with leave one out cross-validation.ResultsMost Active-30mins and Mins≥400 mg had >94% accuracy for correctly classifying "running" and "nonrunning" days, with validation indicating robustness. Variance explained in miles, duration, and training load by Mins≥400 mg (67%-76%) and WL400-4000 mg (55%-69%) was high, with validation indicating robustness.ConclusionsWrist-worn accelerometer metrics can be used to objectively, unobtrusively, and accurately identify running training days in runners, reducing the need for training logs or user input in future prospective research or commercial activity tracking. The high percentage of variance explained in existing self-reported measures of training load by simple, accelerometer-derived metrics of external training load supports the future use of accelerometry for prospective, preventative, and prescriptive monitoring purposes in runners.

Dataset Information

Identifying bedrest using 24-h waist or wrist accelerometry in adults.

Publications

Identifying bedrest using 24-h waist or wrist accelerometry in adults.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets