Cross-validation and out-of-sample testing of physical activity intensity predictions with a wrist-worn accelerometer

被引:23
作者
Montoye, Alexander H. K. [1 ,2 ]
Westgate, Bradford S. [3 ]
Fonley, Morgan R. [3 ]
Pfeiffer, Karin A. [4 ]
机构
[1] Alma Coll, Dept Integrat Physiol & Hlth Sci, Alma, MI USA
[2] Ball State Univ, Clin Exercise Physiol Program, Muncie, IN 47306 USA
[3] Alma Coll, Dept Math & Comp Sci, Alma, MI USA
[4] Michigan State Univ, Dept Kinesiol, E Lansing, MI 48824 USA
关键词
artificial neural network; decision tree; GENEActiv; random forest; support vector machine; SEDENTARY BEHAVIOR; ENERGY-EXPENDITURE; TIME SPENT; CLASSIFICATION; HIP; ALGORITHMS; IDENTIFICATION; CLASSIFIERS; SENSORS; ADULTS;
D O I
10.1152/japplphysiol.00760.2017
中图分类号
Q4 [生理学];
学科分类号
071003 ;
摘要
Wrist-worn accelerometers are gaining popularity for measurement of physical activity. However, few methods for predicting physical activity intensity from wrist-worn accelerometer data have been tested on data not used to create the methods (out-of-sample data). This study utilized two previously collected data sets [Ball State University (BSU) and Michigan State University (MSU)] in which participants wore a GENEActiv accelerometer on the left wrist while performing sedentary, lifestyle, ambulatory, and exercise activities in simulated free-living settings. Activity intensity was determined via direct observation. Four machine learning models (plus 2 combination methods) and six feature sets were used to predict activity intensity (30-s intervals) with the accelerometer data. Leave-one-out cross-validation and out-ofsample testing were performed to evaluate accuracy in activity intensity prediction, and classification accuracies were used to determine differences among feature sets and machine learning models. In out-of-sample testing, the random forest model (77.3-78.5%) had higher accuracy than other machine learning models (70.9-76.4%) and accuracy similar to combination methods (77.0-77.9%). Feature sets utilizing frequency-domain features had improved accuracy over other feature sets in leave-one-out cross-validation (92.6-92.8% vs. 87.8-91.9% in MSU data set; 79.3-80.2% vs. 76.7-78.4% in BSU data set) but similar or worse accuracy in out-of-sample testing (74.0-77.4% vs. 74.1-79.1% in MSU data set; 76.1-77.0% vs. 75.5-77.3% in BSU data set). All machine learning models outperformed the euclidean norm minus one/GGIR method in out-of-sample testing (69.5-78.5% vs. 53.6-70.6%). From these results, we recommend out-of-sample testing to confirm generalizability of machine learning models. Additionally, random forest models and feature sets with only time-domain features provided the best accuracy for activity intensity prediction from a wrist-worn accelerometer. NEW & NOTEWORTHY This study includes in-sample and out-of-sample cross-validation of an alternate method for deriving meaningful physical activity outcomes from accelerometer data collected with a wrist-worn accelerometer. This method uses machine learning to directly predict activity intensity. By so doing, this study provides a classification model that may avoid high errors present with energy expenditure prediction while still allowing researchers to assess adherence to physical activity guidelines.
引用
收藏
页码:1284 / 1293
页数:10
相关论文
共 43 条
  • [1] 2011 Compendium of Physical Activities: A Second Update of Codes and MET Values
    Ainsworth, Barbara E.
    Haskell, William L.
    Herrmann, Stephen D.
    Meckes, Nathanael
    Bassett, David R., Jr.
    Tudor-Locke, Catrine
    Greer, Jennifer L.
    Vezina, Jesse
    Whitt-Glover, Melicia C.
    Leon, Arthur S.
    [J]. MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2011, 43 (08) : 1575 - 1581
  • [2] Estimating Oxygen Uptake During Nonsteady-State Activities and Transitions Using Wearable Sensors
    Altini, Marco
    Penders, Julien
    Amft, Oliver
    [J]. IEEE JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL AND HEALTH INFORMATICS, 2016, 20 (02) : 469 - 475
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2008, 2008 physical activity guidelines for Americans
  • [4] [Anonymous], 2014, C4. 5: programs for machine learning
  • [5] An Activity Index for Raw Accelerometry Data and Its Comparison with Other Activity Metrics
    Bai, Jiawei
    Di, Chongzhi
    Xiao, Luo
    Evenson, Kelly R.
    LaCroix, Andrea Z.
    Crainiceanu, Ciprian M.
    Buchner, David M.
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2016, 11 (08):
  • [6] Intensity Thresholds on Raw Acceleration Data: Euclidean Norm Minus One (ENMO) and Mean Amplitude Deviation (MAD) Approaches
    Bakrania, Kishan
    Yates, Thomas
    Rowlands, Alex V.
    Esliger, Dale W.
    Bunnewell, Sarah
    Sanders, James
    Davies, Melanie
    Khunti, Kamlesh
    Edwardson, Charlotte L.
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2016, 11 (10):
  • [7] Automatic identification of physical activity types and sedentary behaviors from triaxial accelerometer: laboratory-based calibrations are not enough
    Bastian, Thomas
    Maire, Aurelia
    Dugas, Julien
    Ataya, Abbas
    Villars, Clement
    Gris, Florence
    Perrin, Emilie
    Caritu, Yanis
    Doron, Maeva
    Blanc, Stephane
    Jallon, Pierre
    Simon, Chantal
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY, 2015, 118 (06) : 716 - 722
  • [8] Random forests
    Breiman, L
    [J]. MACHINE LEARNING, 2001, 45 (01) : 5 - 32
  • [9] Ensemble Methods for Classification of Physical Activities from Wrist Accelerometry
    Chowdhury, Alok Kumar
    Tjondronegoro, Dian
    Chandran, Vinod
    Trost, Stewart G.
    [J]. MEDICINE & SCIENCE IN SPORTS & EXERCISE, 2017, 49 (09) : 1965 - 1973
  • [10] Variability of Objectively Measured Sedentary Behavior
    Donaldson, Seth C.
    Montoye, Alexander H. K.
    Tuttle, Mary S.
    Kaminsky, Leonard A.
    [J]. MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2016, 48 (04) : 755 - 761