↓ Skip to main content

An open-source tool to identify active travel from hip-worn accelerometer, GPS and GIS data

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
47 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
120 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.
Title
An open-source tool to identify active travel from hip-worn accelerometer, GPS and GIS data
Published in
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12966-018-0724-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Duncan S. Procter, Angie S. Page, Ashley R. Cooper, Claire M. Nightingale, Bina Ram, Alicja R. Rudnicka, Peter H. Whincup, Christelle Clary, Daniel Lewis, Steven Cummins, Anne Ellaway, Billie Giles-Corti, Derek G. Cook, Christopher G. Owen

Abstract

Increases in physical activity through active travel have the potential to have large beneficial effects on populations, through both better health outcomes and reduced motorized traffic. However accurately identifying travel mode in large datasets is problematic. Here we provide an open source tool to quantify time spent stationary and in four travel modes(walking, cycling, train, motorised vehicle) from accelerometer measured physical activity data, combined with GPS and GIS data. The Examining Neighbourhood Activities in Built Living Environments in London study evaluates the effect of the built environment on health behaviours, including physical activity. Participants wore accelerometers and GPS receivers on the hip for 7 days. We time-matched accelerometer and GPS, and then extracted data from the commutes of 326 adult participants, using stated commute times and modes, which were manually checked to confirm stated travel mode. This yielded examples of five travel modes: walking, cycling, motorised vehicle, train and stationary. We used this example data to train a gradient boosted tree, a form of supervised machine learning algorithm, on each data point (131,537 points), rather than on journeys. Accuracy during training was assessed using five-fold cross-validation. We also manually identified the travel behaviour of both 21 participants from ENABLE London (402,749 points), and 10 participants from a separate study (STAMP-2, 210,936 points), who were not included in the training data. We compared our predictions against this manual identification to further test accuracy and test generalisability. Applying the algorithm, we correctly identified travel mode 97.3% of the time in cross-validation (mean sensitivity 96.3%, mean active travel sensitivity 94.6%). We showed 96.0% agreement between manual identification and prediction of 21 individuals' travel modes (mean sensitivity 92.3%, mean active travel sensitivity 84.9%) and 96.5% agreement between the STAMP-2 study and predictions (mean sensitivity 85.5%, mean active travel sensitivity 78.9%). We present a generalizable tool that identifies time spent stationary and time spent walking with very high precision, time spent in trains or vehicles with good precision, and time spent cycling with moderate precisionIn studies where both accelerometer and GPS data are available this tool complements analyses of physical activity, showing whether differences in PA may be explained by differences in travel mode. All code necessary to replicate, fit and predict to other datasets is provided to facilitate use by other researchers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 47 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 120 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 15%
Student > Master 12 10%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Professor 6 5%
Other 21 18%
Unknown 31 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 12 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 8%
Sports and Recreations 9 8%
Computer Science 8 7%
Engineering 6 5%
Other 29 24%
Unknown 47 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 36. 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 July 2019.
All research outputs
#1,041,784
of 24,024,220 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#358
of 2,015 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,402
of 344,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#8
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,024,220 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,015 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
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 344,850 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.