Accurate identification of physical activity types has been achieved in laboratory conditions using single-site accelerometers and classification algorithms. This methodology is then applied to free-living subjects to determine activity behavior. This study is aimed at analyzing the reproducibility of the accuracy of laboratory-trained classification algorithms in free-living subjects during daily life. A support vector machine (SVM), a feed-forward neural network (NN), and a decision tree (DT) were trained with data collected by a waist-mounted accelerometer during a laboratory trial. The reproducibility of the classification performance was tested on data collected in daily life using a multiple-site accelerometer augmented with an activity diary for 20 healthy subjects (age: 30 ± 9; BMI: 23.0 ± 2.6 kg/m(2)). Leave-one-subject-out cross validation of the training data showed accuracies of 95.1 ± 4.3%, 91.4 ± 6.7%, and 92.2 ± 6.6% for the SVM, NN, and DT, respectively. All algorithms showed a significantly decreased accuracy in daily life as compared to the reference truth represented by the IDEEA and diary classifications (75.6 ± 10.4%, 74.8 ± 9.7%, and 72.2 ± 10.3%; p < 0.05). In conclusion, cross validation of training data overestimates the accuracy of the classification algorithms in daily life.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gyllensten et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: