Loading...
The Use of a Smartphone to Assess the Two-Minute Step Test: Validity of Machine Learning Compared to Analytical Data Processing
Hoffmann, G.O. Martini, G.P. Rodacki, A.L.F.
Hoffmann, G.O.
Martini, G.P.
Rodacki, A.L.F.
Publication Date
2026-02-28
End of Embargo
Supervisor
Rights
© 2026 The Author(s). This is an Open Access article distributed under the Creative Commons CC-BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Peer-Reviewed
Yes
Open Access status
openAccess
Accepted for publication
2026-02-24
Institution
Department
Awarded
Embargo end date
Files
Loading...
hoffmann_et_al_2026.pdf
Adobe PDF, 2.1 MB
Additional title
Abstract
The 2-Minute Step Test (2MST) is commonly scored by step count, which overlooks how the task is performed. This study tested whether a smartphone held to the thigh can be used to quantify thigh kinematics to determine 2MST outcome parameters, and whether a machine learning (ML) data analysis approach of the smartphone signal yields better agreement with motion capture (ground truth) compared to a more typical analytical data analysis approach (AA). Eighty-four healthy adults completed the 2MST while holding a smartphone against the right thigh. A thigh angular velocity ‘ground truth’ reference was obtained by simultaneous recording via motion capture (Vicon). Smartphone signals were resampled and processed using analytical (i.e., adaptive Butterworth filtering) and machine-learning data processing approaches (i.e., a stacked regression model trained to identify peak angular velocities). Step cycles and cycle duration were identical across equipment modalities and data analysis pipelines (mean 143 ± 18 cycles; 0.84 ± 0.11 s). However, the mean and variability of peak thigh angular velocity differed across the different modalities/pipelines (motion capture: 303 ± 39°·s−1; AA: 280 ± 47°·s−1; ML: 304 ± 37°·s−1). Bland–Altman agreement, compared to the ground truth measure, showed larger bias and limits of agreement for AA (bias 25.5°·s−1; −49.8–100.8) compared to ML (bias 1.0°·s−1; −15.4–17.5). These findings support using a smartphone held to the thigh to assess how the 2MST is performed, including providing the number and timing of steps completed and the average and variability in thigh angular velocity across cycles. Findings also suggest that a machine learning data analysis approach provides thigh angular velocity measures that are nearly identical to motion capture techniques, whereas a typical analytical data analysis approach has errors of around 8%.
Version
Published version
Citation
Hoffmann GO, Martini GP, Buckley J et al (2026) The Use of a Smartphone to Assess the Two-Minute Step Test: Validity of Machine Learning Compared to Analytical Data Processing. Sensors. 26(5): 1520.
Link to publisher’s version
Link to published version
Link to Version of Record
Type
Article