Evidence Hub

Diagnostic performance of actigraphy in Alzheimer’s disease using a machine learning classifier – a cross-sectional memory clinic study

M. H. Gramkow, A. Brink-Kjær, F. K. Clemmensen, Nikolai Sulkjær Sjælland, Gunhild Waldemar, P. Jennum, S. Hasselbalch, K. Frederiksen

Alzheimer's Research & Therapy, 2025

70 participants · 9 citations

Abstract

Movement patterns, activity levels and circadian rhythm are altered in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and can be assessed by actigraphy using wearable sensors. We aimed to determine the diagnostic performance of actigraphy in AD in a memory clinic population by using a machine-learning classifier. In our single-center cross-sectional study, 70 patients with AD (MCI-moderate dementia), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) (N = 29) and cerebrovascular disease (CVD) (N = 23), and 48 elderly healthy controls were included. Participants underwent actigraphy at home using two body-worn sensors (SENS Motion®) for 1 week. We derived movement patterns (walking, running, resting, etc.) from raw accelerometry data using a proprietary algorithm. By evaluating the movement patterns during day and nighttime, we calculated 510 activity-related features, including robustness and fragmentation of the circadian rhythm. These features were used to train a machine learning (ML) classifier using logistic regression. We evaluated the performance of our classifier by assessing the accuracy and precision of predictions. We found that movement patterns as well as the robustness and fragmentation of the circadian rhythm differed significantly between groups. During the daytime, patients with AD performed less moderate activity and walked less than the healthy group. While we achieved a modest accuracy of 68.8% for differentiating AD and healthy, the performance was highest (accuracy: 80−89%; precision: 69−84%)…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 70 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free