Cargando…

Using Bluetooth proximity sensing to determine where office workers spend time at work

BACKGROUND: Most wearable devices that measure movement in workplaces cannot determine the context in which people spend time. This study examined the accuracy of Bluetooth sensing (10-second intervals) via the ActiGraph GT9X Link monitor to determine location in an office setting, using two simple,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Clark, Bronwyn K., Winkler, Elisabeth A., Brakenridge, Charlotte L., Trost, Stewart G., Healy, Genevieve N.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5841797/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29513754
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193971
_version_ 1783304799699075072
author Clark, Bronwyn K.
Winkler, Elisabeth A.
Brakenridge, Charlotte L.
Trost, Stewart G.
Healy, Genevieve N.
author_facet Clark, Bronwyn K.
Winkler, Elisabeth A.
Brakenridge, Charlotte L.
Trost, Stewart G.
Healy, Genevieve N.
author_sort Clark, Bronwyn K.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Most wearable devices that measure movement in workplaces cannot determine the context in which people spend time. This study examined the accuracy of Bluetooth sensing (10-second intervals) via the ActiGraph GT9X Link monitor to determine location in an office setting, using two simple, bespoke algorithms. METHODS: For one work day (mean±SD 6.2±1.1 hours), 30 office workers (30% men, aged 38±11 years) simultaneously wore chest-mounted cameras (video recording) and Bluetooth-enabled monitors (initialised as receivers) on the wrist and thigh. Additional monitors (initialised as beacons) were placed in the entry, kitchen, photocopy room, corridors, and the wearer’s office. Firstly, participant presence/absence at each location was predicted from the presence/absence of signals at that location (ignoring all other signals). Secondly, using the information gathered at multiple locations simultaneously, a simple heuristic model was used to predict at which location the participant was present. The Bluetooth-determined location for each algorithm was tested against the camera in terms of F-scores. RESULTS: When considering locations individually, the accuracy obtained was excellent in the office (F-score = 0.98 and 0.97 for thigh and wrist positions) but poor in other locations (F-score = 0.04 to 0.36), stemming primarily from a high false positive rate. The multi-location algorithm exhibited high accuracy for the office location (F-score = 0.97 for both wear positions). It also improved the F-scores obtained in the remaining locations, but not always to levels indicating good accuracy (e.g., F-score for photocopy room ≈0.1 in both wear positions). CONCLUSIONS: The Bluetooth signalling function shows promise for determining where workers spend most of their time (i.e., their office). Placing beacons in multiple locations and using a rule-based decision model improved classification accuracy; however, for workplace locations visited infrequently or with considerable movement, accuracy was below desirable levels. Further development of algorithms is warranted.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5841797
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58417972018-03-23 Using Bluetooth proximity sensing to determine where office workers spend time at work Clark, Bronwyn K. Winkler, Elisabeth A. Brakenridge, Charlotte L. Trost, Stewart G. Healy, Genevieve N. PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Most wearable devices that measure movement in workplaces cannot determine the context in which people spend time. This study examined the accuracy of Bluetooth sensing (10-second intervals) via the ActiGraph GT9X Link monitor to determine location in an office setting, using two simple, bespoke algorithms. METHODS: For one work day (mean±SD 6.2±1.1 hours), 30 office workers (30% men, aged 38±11 years) simultaneously wore chest-mounted cameras (video recording) and Bluetooth-enabled monitors (initialised as receivers) on the wrist and thigh. Additional monitors (initialised as beacons) were placed in the entry, kitchen, photocopy room, corridors, and the wearer’s office. Firstly, participant presence/absence at each location was predicted from the presence/absence of signals at that location (ignoring all other signals). Secondly, using the information gathered at multiple locations simultaneously, a simple heuristic model was used to predict at which location the participant was present. The Bluetooth-determined location for each algorithm was tested against the camera in terms of F-scores. RESULTS: When considering locations individually, the accuracy obtained was excellent in the office (F-score = 0.98 and 0.97 for thigh and wrist positions) but poor in other locations (F-score = 0.04 to 0.36), stemming primarily from a high false positive rate. The multi-location algorithm exhibited high accuracy for the office location (F-score = 0.97 for both wear positions). It also improved the F-scores obtained in the remaining locations, but not always to levels indicating good accuracy (e.g., F-score for photocopy room ≈0.1 in both wear positions). CONCLUSIONS: The Bluetooth signalling function shows promise for determining where workers spend most of their time (i.e., their office). Placing beacons in multiple locations and using a rule-based decision model improved classification accuracy; however, for workplace locations visited infrequently or with considerable movement, accuracy was below desirable levels. Further development of algorithms is warranted. Public Library of Science 2018-03-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5841797/ /pubmed/29513754 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193971 Text en © 2018 Clark et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Clark, Bronwyn K.
Winkler, Elisabeth A.
Brakenridge, Charlotte L.
Trost, Stewart G.
Healy, Genevieve N.
Using Bluetooth proximity sensing to determine where office workers spend time at work
title Using Bluetooth proximity sensing to determine where office workers spend time at work
title_full Using Bluetooth proximity sensing to determine where office workers spend time at work
title_fullStr Using Bluetooth proximity sensing to determine where office workers spend time at work
title_full_unstemmed Using Bluetooth proximity sensing to determine where office workers spend time at work
title_short Using Bluetooth proximity sensing to determine where office workers spend time at work
title_sort using bluetooth proximity sensing to determine where office workers spend time at work
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5841797/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29513754
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193971
work_keys_str_mv AT clarkbronwynk usingbluetoothproximitysensingtodeterminewhereofficeworkersspendtimeatwork
AT winklerelisabetha usingbluetoothproximitysensingtodeterminewhereofficeworkersspendtimeatwork
AT brakenridgecharlottel usingbluetoothproximitysensingtodeterminewhereofficeworkersspendtimeatwork
AT troststewartg usingbluetoothproximitysensingtodeterminewhereofficeworkersspendtimeatwork
AT healygenevieven usingbluetoothproximitysensingtodeterminewhereofficeworkersspendtimeatwork