Automatic Recognition and Analysis of Balance Activity in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Algorithm Validation
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Background: Clinical mobility and balance assessments identify older adults who have a high risk of falls in clinics. In the past two decades, sensors have been a popular supplement to mobility and balance assessment to provide quantitative information and a cost-effective solution in the community environment. Nonetheless, the current sensor-based balance assessment relies on manual observation or motion-specific features to identify motions of research interest. Objective: The objective of this study was to develop an automatic motion data analytics framework using signal data collected from an inertial sensor for balance activity analysis in community-dwelling older adults. Methods: In total, 59 community-dwelling older adults (19 males and 40 females; mean age = 81.86 years, SD 6.95 years) were recruited in this study. Data were collected using a body-worn inertial measurement unit (including an accelerometer and a gyroscope) at the L4 vertebra of each individual. After data preprocessing and motion detection via a convolutional long short-term memory (LSTM) neural network, a one-class support vector machine (SVM), linear discriminant analysis (LDA), and k-nearest neighborhood (k-NN) were adopted to classify high-risk individuals. Results: The framework developed in this study yielded mean accuracies of 87%, 86%, and 89% in detecting sit-to-stand, turning 360°, and stand-to-sit motions, respectively. The balance assessment classification showed accuracies of 90%, 92%, and 86% in classifying abnormal sit-to-stand, turning 360°, and stand-to-sit motions, respectively, using Tinetti Performance Oriented Mobility Assessment-Balance (POMA-B) criteria by the one-class SVM and k-NN. Conclusions: The sensor-based approach presented in this study provided a time-effective manner with less human efforts to identify and preprocess the inertial signal and thus enabled an efficient balance assessment tool for medical professionals. In the long run, the approach may offer a flexible solution to relieve the community’s burden of continuous health monitoring.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Deep Convolutional and LSTM Recurrent Neural Networks for Multimodal Wearable Activity Recognition
Ordóñez, F., & Roggen, D. (2016) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s16010115 · Cited by 2,761 · see citing works
The Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) to Differentiate Balance Deficits
Horak, F. B., Wrisley, D. M., & Frank, J. (2009) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.2522/ptj.20080071 · Cited by 1,062 · see citing works
UniMiB SHAR: A Dataset for Human Activity Recognition Using Acceleration Data from Smartphones
Micucci, D., Mobilio, M., & Napoletano, P. (2017) · doi:10.20944/preprints201706.0033.v1 · Cited by 596 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The majority of developed methods adopt machine learning models [37-39] or deep learning [40-45] to build on and validate renowned public data sets, such as the University of California, Irvine (UCI)-HAR [46] and UniMib SHAR [47], that target healthy adults aged 30 years or less.”
MethodUniMiB SHAR: A Dataset for Human Activity Recognition Using Acceleration Data from Smartphones
Micucci, D., Mobilio, M., & Napoletano, P. (2017) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app7101101 · Cited by 596 · see citing works
Capela, N. A., Lemaire, E. D., & Baddour, N. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0124414 · Cited by 197 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Hsu, Y.-C., Wang, H., Zhao, Y., Chen, F., & Tsui, K.-L.
- Affiliations
- City University of Hong Kong (HK)
- Hong Kong Polytechnic University (HK)
- Sun Yat-sen University (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Zhao, Yang
- Venue
- Journal of Medical Internet Research
- Publisher
- JMIR Publications Inc.
- Published
- 2021-12-20
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- e30135
- ISSN
- 1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC8726020
- OpenAlex
- W4200379997
- Cited by
- 9
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 2.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- public-domain
- Locations
- Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, public-domain)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- CityU Scholars (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- VTechWorks (Virginia Tech) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- City University of Hong Kong (9610406)
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (71901188)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
- Keywords
- balance assessment, community-dwelling older adults, inertial measurement unit, wearable sensors, fall risk, sit-to-stand, turning motion, motion detection, convolutional LSTM, one-class support vector machine, fall risk classification, health monitoring
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Algorithms, Postural Balance, Female, Humans, Male, Risk Assessment, Independent Living
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review