Machine learning differentiation of Parkinson’s disease and normal pressure hydrocephalus using wearable sensors capturing gait impairments
Rattachement africain : lu, de, gr, gb. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Abstract Gait impairments in patients with Parkinson’s Disease (PD) and Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus (NPH) are diagnosed with visual clinical assessments. Despite standardized gait tests and clinicians’ expertise, such approaches can be subjective and challenging due to similar symptoms between the two diseases. Wearable sensors and machine learning (ML) can assist clinicians by offering objective and quantitative assessments of gait impairments that can help distinguishing between PD and NPH. This study consists of a cohort of 12 PD and 11 NPH patients that performed standardized gait tests. Gait was measured by wearable sensors embedded in patients’ shoes: a three-axis gyroscope, a three-axis accelerometer and eight pressure sensors in each insole. Sensors and computational pipeline to extract gait cycle features were validated and calibrated on 21 healthy subjects. ML approaches were employed to identify changes in gait cycle features between the PD and NPH patients groups. Twenty-seven ML classifiers were compared, leading to select linear support vector machines, resulting in a classification accuracy of 0.70 ± 0.28 and an area under the ROC curve of 0.74 ± 0.39. Combining wearable sensors with ML algorithms trained on gait cycle features from those sensors showed the potential for objective differentiation of gait patterns between PD and NPH patients.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Machine learning differentiation of Parkinson’s disease and normal pressure hydrocephalus using wearable sensors capturing gait impairments
- Date Crossref
- 01/10/2026
- Éditeur
- Elsevier BV
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.