Parkinson Disease Recognition Using a Gamified Website: Machine Learning Development and Usability Study.
Parkinson disease
accessible screening
digital health
machine learning
remote screening
Journal
JMIR formative research
ISSN: 2561-326X
Titre abrégé: JMIR Form Res
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101726394
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Sep 2023
29 Sep 2023
Historique:
received:
14
06
2023
accepted:
04
09
2023
revised:
16
08
2023
medline:
29
9
2023
pubmed:
29
9
2023
entrez:
29
9
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Parkinson disease (PD) affects millions globally, causing motor function impairments. Early detection is vital, and diverse data sources aid diagnosis. We focus on lower arm movements during keyboard and trackpad or touchscreen interactions, which serve as reliable indicators of PD. Previous works explore keyboard tapping and unstructured device monitoring; we attempt to further these works with structured tests taking into account 2D hand movement in addition to finger tapping. Our feasibility study uses keystroke and mouse movement data from a remotely conducted, structured, web-based test combined with self-reported PD status to create a predictive model for detecting the presence of PD. Analysis of finger tapping speed and accuracy through keyboard input and analysis of 2D hand movement through mouse input allowed differentiation between participants with and without PD. This comparative analysis enables us to establish clear distinctions between the two groups and explore the feasibility of using motor behavior to predict the presence of the disease. Participants were recruited via email by the Hawaii Parkinson Association (HPA) and directed to a web application for the tests. The 2023 HPA symposium was also used as a forum to recruit participants and spread information about our study. The application recorded participant demographics, including age, gender, and race, as well as PD status. We conducted a series of tests to assess finger tapping, using on-screen prompts to request key presses of constant and random keys. Response times, accuracy, and unintended movements resulting in accidental presses were recorded. Participants performed a hand movement test consisting of tracing straight and curved on-screen ribbons using a trackpad or mouse, allowing us to evaluate stability and precision of 2D hand movement. From this tracing, the test collected and stored insights concerning lower arm motor movement. Our formative study included 31 participants, 18 without PD and 13 with PD, and analyzed their lower limb movement data collected from keyboards and computer mice. From the data set, we extracted 28 features and evaluated their significances using an extra tree classifier predictor. A random forest model was trained using the 6 most important features identified by the predictor. These selected features provided insights into precision and movement speed derived from keyboard tapping and mouse tracing tests. This final model achieved an average F This preliminary feasibility study suggests the possibility of using technology-based limb movement data to predict the presence of PD, demonstrating the practicality of implementing this approach in a cost-effective and accessible manner. In addition, this study demonstrates that structured mouse movement tests can be used in combination with finger tapping to detect PD.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Parkinson disease (PD) affects millions globally, causing motor function impairments. Early detection is vital, and diverse data sources aid diagnosis. We focus on lower arm movements during keyboard and trackpad or touchscreen interactions, which serve as reliable indicators of PD. Previous works explore keyboard tapping and unstructured device monitoring; we attempt to further these works with structured tests taking into account 2D hand movement in addition to finger tapping. Our feasibility study uses keystroke and mouse movement data from a remotely conducted, structured, web-based test combined with self-reported PD status to create a predictive model for detecting the presence of PD.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
Analysis of finger tapping speed and accuracy through keyboard input and analysis of 2D hand movement through mouse input allowed differentiation between participants with and without PD. This comparative analysis enables us to establish clear distinctions between the two groups and explore the feasibility of using motor behavior to predict the presence of the disease.
METHODS
METHODS
Participants were recruited via email by the Hawaii Parkinson Association (HPA) and directed to a web application for the tests. The 2023 HPA symposium was also used as a forum to recruit participants and spread information about our study. The application recorded participant demographics, including age, gender, and race, as well as PD status. We conducted a series of tests to assess finger tapping, using on-screen prompts to request key presses of constant and random keys. Response times, accuracy, and unintended movements resulting in accidental presses were recorded. Participants performed a hand movement test consisting of tracing straight and curved on-screen ribbons using a trackpad or mouse, allowing us to evaluate stability and precision of 2D hand movement. From this tracing, the test collected and stored insights concerning lower arm motor movement.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Our formative study included 31 participants, 18 without PD and 13 with PD, and analyzed their lower limb movement data collected from keyboards and computer mice. From the data set, we extracted 28 features and evaluated their significances using an extra tree classifier predictor. A random forest model was trained using the 6 most important features identified by the predictor. These selected features provided insights into precision and movement speed derived from keyboard tapping and mouse tracing tests. This final model achieved an average F
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This preliminary feasibility study suggests the possibility of using technology-based limb movement data to predict the presence of PD, demonstrating the practicality of implementing this approach in a cost-effective and accessible manner. In addition, this study demonstrates that structured mouse movement tests can be used in combination with finger tapping to detect PD.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37773607
pii: v7i1e49898
doi: 10.2196/49898
pmc: PMC10576230
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e49898Informations de copyright
©Shubham Parab, Jerry Boster, Peter Washington. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (https://formative.jmir.org), 29.09.2023.
Références
J Med Internet Res. 2022 Feb 15;24(2):e31830
pubmed: 35166683
PLoS One. 2014 Apr 29;9(4):e96260
pubmed: 24781810
Annu Rev Biomed Data Sci. 2023 Aug 10;6:211-228
pubmed: 37137169
Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2015 Jun;21(6):650-3
pubmed: 25819808
Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging. 2020 Aug;5(8):759-769
pubmed: 32085921
Rev Bras Enferm. 2018 Mar-Apr;71(2):272-279
pubmed: 29412283
Sci Rep. 2020 Dec 10;10(1):21749
pubmed: 33303875
Iperception. 2018 Jun 11;9(3):2041669518780807
pubmed: 29977490
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 Oct;85(10):1578-85
pubmed: 15468014
Int Rev Neurobiol. 2010;90:81-92
pubmed: 20692495
Neuropsychologia. 2009 Jan;47(1):145-57
pubmed: 18761363
NPJ Digit Med. 2022 Mar 18;5(1):32
pubmed: 35304579
Mov Disord. 2013 Oct;28(12):1628-37
pubmed: 24030855
Patterns (N Y). 2020 Jun 12;1(3):
pubmed: 32699844
JAMA Neurol. 2018 Jul 1;75(7):876-880
pubmed: 29582075
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2002 Nov;73(5):529-34
pubmed: 12397145
Am J Manag Care. 2012 Sep;18(7 Suppl):S176-82
pubmed: 23039866
Commun Biol. 2022 Jan 17;5(1):58
pubmed: 35039601
Psychophysiology. 2015 Oct;52(10):1305-16
pubmed: 26174940
NPJ Digit Med. 2018 Nov 23;1:64
pubmed: 31304341
PLoS One. 2017 Nov 30;12(11):e0188226
pubmed: 29190695
Mov Disord. 2017 Feb;32(2):219-226
pubmed: 28090684
Brain. 2013 Aug;136(Pt 8):2419-31
pubmed: 23884810
Neurology. 2004 Oct 26;63(8 Suppl 3):S12-6
pubmed: 15505135
Mov Disord. 2012 Oct;27(12):1563-6
pubmed: 23032728
Lancet Neurol. 2006 Jan;5(1):75-86
pubmed: 16361025
Lancet. 2021 Jun 12;397(10291):2284-2303
pubmed: 33848468
Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Dec;98(51):e18444
pubmed: 31861016
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2012 Oct;55(5):1289-300
pubmed: 22411280
Lancet Neurol. 2018 Nov;17(11):928-929
pubmed: 30287052
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1999 Nov;67(5):624-9
pubmed: 10519869
JMIR Pediatr Parent. 2022 Apr 8;5(2):e26760
pubmed: 35394438
Nat Biotechnol. 2022 Apr;40(4):480-487
pubmed: 34373643
Chaos. 2012 Mar;22(1):013119
pubmed: 22462995
Clin Neurophysiol. 2020 Mar;131(3):694-702
pubmed: 31991312
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Mar 26;20(3):e89
pubmed: 29581092
NPJ Digit Med. 2021 Mar 19;4(1):53
pubmed: 33742069
Sensors (Basel). 2015 Sep 17;15(9):23727-44
pubmed: 26393595
J Parkinsons Dis. 2022;12(4):1083-1113
pubmed: 35253780