Blog
About

20
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      On-Body Sensing Solutions for Automatic Dietary Monitoring

      ,

      IEEE Pervasive Computing

      Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 13

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Limitations in the assessment of dietary energy intake by self-report.

          Development of the doubly-labeled water method has made it possible to test the validity of dietary intake instruments for the measurement of energy intake. Comparisons of measured energy expenditure with energy intake from either weighed or estimated dietary records against energy expenditure have indicated that obese subjects, female endurance athletes, and adolescents underestimate habitual and actual energy intake. Individual underestimates of 50% are not uncommon. Even in non-obese adults, where bias is minimal, the standard deviation for individual errors in energy intake approaches 20%. Two investigations of the validity of self-reported dietary records for measuring change in dietary intake also indicate large underestimates of the actual change. Because of bias and imprecision, self-reported energy intakes should be interpreted with caution unless independent methods of assessing their validity are included in the experimental design.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Gesture spotting with body-worn inertial sensors to detect user activities

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Accuracy and precision of two in-shoe pressure measurement systems.

              The recent rapid adoption of insole pressure measurement systems for clinical and ergonomic evaluations of human gait has necessitated a comprehensive understanding of the accuracy and precision of such systems. Five bench experiments were performed to examine the Pedar and F-Scan in-shoe pressure measurement systems. The insoles examined were the Pedar Y-sized right insole and the F-scan insole trimmed to the size and shape of a Pedar Y-sized insole. Data were sampled at 50 Hz at different levels of applied pressure, calibration procedure, duration of pressure application, insole age of use and experiment day or week. The system accuracy was determined by the per cent error of measurement, the system precision by the 95% tolerance interval of the per cent error. The results show that system accuracy and precision varied among levels of applied pressure, calibration procedure, duration of pressure application and insole age of use. The Pedar system showed the greatest accuracy and precision when the insole was new and measurements were taken (1) after a system calibration as specified by the manufacturer, (2) in the 50 - 500 kPa pressure range and (3) within a few seconds after pressure was applied. Under this condition, the measurement error was in the range -0.6 to 2.7%, and the magnitude (upper bound minus lower bound) of the 95% tolerance intervals was from 13.5 to 18.7%. Measuring less than 35 kPa with the Pedar system is not recommended. To ensure the accuracy and precision of the F-Scan system, users are recommended to estimate the range of the applied pressure and then choose a similar pressure level for calibration. Under this condition, the measurement error was in the range 1.3 - 5.8% and the magnitude (upper bound minus lower bound) of the 95% tolerance intervals was estimated to be in the range 1.1 - 14.8%. When the calibration pressure was outside this range of applied pressure, the per cent errors were considerably higher, ranging from -26.3 to 33.9%.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                IEEE Pervasive Computing
                IEEE Pervasive Comput.
                Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
                1536-1268
                April 2009
                April 2009
                : 8
                : 2
                : 62-70
                Article
                10.1109/MPRV.2009.32
                © 2009
                Product

                Comments

                Comment on this article