↓ Skip to main content

Decision Trees for Detection of Activity Intensity in Youth with Cerebral Palsy

Overview of attention for article published in Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercise, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
175 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Decision Trees for Detection of Activity Intensity in Youth with Cerebral Palsy
Published in
Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercise, May 2016
DOI 10.1249/mss.0000000000000842
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To develop and test decision tree (DT) models to classify physical activity (PA) intensity from accelerometer output and Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) classification level in ambulatory youth with cerebral palsy (CP); and 2) compare the classification accuracy of the new DT models to that achieved by previously published cut-points for youth with CP. Youth with CP (GMFCS Levels I - III) (N=51) completed seven activity trials with increasing PA intensity while wearing a portable metabolic system and ActiGraph GT3X accelerometers. DT models were used to identify vertical axis (VA) and vector magnitude (VM) count thresholds corresponding to sedentary (SED) (<1.5 METs), light PA (LPA) (≥1.5 and <3 METs) and moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) (≥3 METs). Models were trained and cross-validated using the 'rpart' and 'caret' packages within R. For the VA (VA_DT) and VM decision trees (VM_DT), a single threshold differentiated LPA from SED, while the threshold for differentiating MVPA from LPA decreased as the level of impairment increased. The average cross-validation accuracy for the VC_DT was 81.1%, 76.7%, and 82.9% for GMFCS levels I, II, and III, respectively. The corresponding cross-validation accuracy for the VM_DT was 80.5%, 75.6%, and 84.2%, respectively. Within each GMFCS level, the decision tree models achieved better PA intensity recognition than previously published cut-points. The accuracy differential was greatest among GMFCS level III participants, in whom the previously published cut-points misclassified 40% of the MVPA activity trials. GMFCS-specific cut-points provide more accurate assessments of MVPA levels in youth with CP across the full spectrum of ambulatory ability.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 175 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 174 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 21%
Student > Master 16 9%
Researcher 12 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 6%
Professor 9 5%
Other 26 15%
Unknown 64 37%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 15%
Sports and Recreations 19 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 10%
Engineering 11 6%
Social Sciences 7 4%
Other 29 17%
Unknown 66 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 December 2015.
All research outputs
#28,602,152
of 34,361,833 outputs
Outputs from Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercise
#7,605
of 8,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#262,209
of 336,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercise
#159
of 250 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,361,833 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,576 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.3. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 336,116 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 250 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.