RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here. You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/. Click “accept” to agree.
A multimodal sensing platform to capture cardiac physiology, motion, and vocalizations
Islam, B., McElwain, N. L., Li, J., Davila, M. I., Hu, Y., Hu, K., Bodway, J. M., Dhekne, A., Roy Choudhury, R., & Hasegawa-Johnson, M. (2024). Preliminary technical validation of LittleBeats™: A multimodal sensing platform to capture cardiac physiology, motion, and vocalizations. Sensors, 24(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/s24030901
Across five studies, we present the preliminary technical validation of an infant-wearable platform, LittleBeats™, that integrates electrocardiogram (ECG), inertial measurement unit (IMU), and audio sensors. Each sensor modality is validated against data from gold-standard equipment using established algorithms and laboratory tasks. Interbeat interval (IBI) data obtained from the LittleBeats™ ECG sensor indicate acceptable mean absolute percent error rates for both adults (Study 1, N = 16) and infants (Study 2, N = 5) across low- and high-challenge sessions and expected patterns of change in respiratory sinus arrythmia (RSA). For automated activity recognition (upright vs. walk vs. glide vs. squat) using accelerometer data from the LittleBeats™ IMU (Study 3, N = 12 adults), performance was good to excellent, with smartphone (industry standard) data outperforming LittleBeats™ by less than 4 percentage points. Speech emotion recognition (Study 4, N = 8 adults) applied to LittleBeats™ versus smartphone audio data indicated a comparable performance, with no significant difference in error rates. On an automatic speech recognition task (Study 5, N = 12 adults), the best performing algorithm yielded relatively low word error rates, although LittleBeats™ (4.16%) versus smartphone (2.73%) error rates were somewhat higher. Together, these validation studies indicate that LittleBeats™ sensors yield a data quality that is largely comparable to those obtained from gold-standard devices and established protocols used in prior research.
