Skip to main content

Table 3 Compariosn among METs parameters in predection for “dyskinesia”

From: The relationships between three-axis accelerometer measures of physical activity and motor symptoms in patients with Parkinson’s disease: a single-center pilot study

Parameters AUROC 95% CI P-value
Area
 Over 1.5 METs 0.956 0.913–0.999 0.21
 Over 2 METs 0.932 0.884–0.981 0.011
 Over 2.5 METs 0.859 0.785–0.933 < 0.001
 Over 3.0 METs 0.677 0.598–0.756 < 0.001
Time
 Over 1.5 METs 0.959 0.918–1.000 reference
 Over 2 METs 0.943 0.897–0.989 0.062
 Over 2.5 METs 0.872 0.799–0.946 < 0.01
 Over 3.0 METs 0.678 0.595–0.760 < 0.001
Peaks
 Over 1.5 METs 0.942 0.881–1.000 0.16
 Over 2 METs 0.930 0.862–0.998 0.041
 Over 2.5 METs 0.870 0.782–0.957 0.010
 Over 3.0 METs 0.713 0.622–0.804 < 0.001
  1. AUROC Area under receiver operating curve, CI Confidence interval; MET, metabolic equivalents of task. (A) We compared the performance o f METs parameters as predictive models for the “On” state, with estimates of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). The performance of time over 2 METs (AUROC: 0.779, 95% CI: 0.733–0.824) was higher than that of time and peaks over 2.5 METs and was significantly higher than the others. (B) We compared the performance of METs parameters as predictive models for the “dyskinesia” state, with estimates of AUROC. The performance of time over 1.5 METs (AUROC: 0.959, 95% CI: 0.918–1.000) was higer than that of area and peaks over 1.5 METs and time over 2 METs, and significantly higher than the others