SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Grouping successive freezing of gait episodes has neutral to detrimental effect on freeze detection and prediction in Parkinson's disease.

PLoS One · 2021-10-12

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0258544PMID: 34637473

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Freezing of gait (FOG) is an intermittent walking disturbance experienced by people with Parkinson's disease (PD). Wearable FOG identification systems can improve gait and reduce the risk of falling due to FOG by detecting FOG in real-time and providing a cue to reduce freeze duration. However, FOG prediction and prevention is desirable. Datasets used to train machine learning models often generate ground truth FOG labels based on visual observation of specific lower limb movements (event-based definition) or an overall inability to walk effectively (period of gait disruption based definition). FOG definition ambiguity may affect model performance, especially with respect to multiple FOG in rapid succession. This research examined whether merging multiple freezes that occurred in rapid succession could improve FOG detection and prediction model performance. Plantar pressure and lower limb acceleration data were used to extract a feature set and train decision tree ensembles. FOG was labeled using an event-based definition. Additional datasets were then produced by merging FOG that occurred in rapid succession. A merging threshold was introduced where FOG that were separated by less than the merging threshold were merged into one episode. FOG detection and prediction models were trained for merging thresholds of 0, 1, 2, and 3 s. Merging slightly improved FOG detection model performance; however, for the prediction model, merging resulted in slightly later FOG identification and lower precision. FOG prediction models may benefit from using event-based FOG definitions and avoiding merging multiple FOG in rapid succession.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.