4.6 Article

Machine Learning Approach to Support the Detection of Parkinson's Disease in IMU-Based Gait Analysis

Journal

SENSORS
Volume 22, Issue 10, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s22103700

Keywords

machine learning; artificial intelligence; gait analysis; Parkinson's disease; harmonic ratio; K-nearest neighbors; support vector machine; random forest; artificial neural network; decision tree

Funding

  1. INAIL
  2. European Union [871237]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to determine the most accurate supervised machine learning algorithm for classifying people with Parkinson's disease from healthy subjects based on gait features. The study found that support vector machine, decision trees, and random forest showed the best classification performances.
The aim of this study was to determine which supervised machine learning (ML) algorithm can most accurately classify people with Parkinson's disease (pwPD) from speed-matched healthy subjects (HS) based on a selected minimum set of IMU-derived gait features. Twenty-two gait features were extrapolated from the trunk acceleration patterns of 81 pwPD and 80 HS, including spatiotemporal, pelvic kinematics, and acceleration-derived gait stability indexes. After a three-level feature selection procedure, seven gait features were considered for implementing five ML algorithms: support vector machine (SVM), artificial neural network, decision trees (DT), random forest (RF), and K-nearest neighbors. Accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 score were calculated. SVM, DT, and RF showed the best classification performances, with prediction accuracy higher than 80% on the test set. The conceptual model of approaching ML that we proposed could reduce the risk of overrepresenting multicollinear gait features in the model, reducing the risk of overfitting in the test performances while fostering the explainability of the results.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available