Prototype platform design and deployment
We designed a prototype platform and deployed it to the home of a single patient (Figure 1). After the first installation of hardware in the home, the platform can be maintained, and data collected entirely through remote access. The INS devices, smart watches, and cameras have patient-facing applications allowing patients to start and stop recordings. The video collection hardware enables automatic video recordings after an approved schedule has been configured. Patients can easily cancel an ongoing recording by simply pressing a button on the video recording application GUI (Figure 2). All collected data was encrypted and transferred to a cloud storage site for researchers to process and analyze.
Data collection
For the first deployments and data collection cycles, we asked the patient to conduct self-guided clinical tasks. The tasks were taken from the unified Parkinson's disease rating scale (UPDRS)26, namely resting tremor, thumb-to-index finger tapping, hand opening and closing, wrist pronation-supination, sit-to-stand movement and walking, and a typing task. All tasks were repeated three times for each recording day. For each repetition, a different stimulation amplitude was set to expose potential stimulation-related symptoms of PD. Figure 4 shows a schematized example of what a week of data collected with the system might look like.

Figure 4: Data availability. A schematized demonstration of what a week of data collected with the system might look like. The top plot shows the stimulation level (blue) over the course of several day/night cycles. Stimulation changes for this patient are dependent on their sleep schedule and the times of medication intake (vertical red lines). At arbitrary times throughout the day, the data collection system can be enabled remotely to collect data for multiple modalities, shown as colored boxes. One example of all the parallel, time-aligned data-streams, just down-selected to the left side of the body, is shown in the bottom plot. During this recording, the patient was asked to perform a series of clinical assessments during low, therapeutic, and high amplitude stimulation conditions. All data shown here corresponds to real data collected but has been compressed across separate experiments for ease of visualization and to show variety. Abbreviations: LFP=local field potential, STN=Subthalamic nucleus, Accel=accelerometer, Gyro=gyroscope, 2D=two-dimensional. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Manual alignment
The manual alignment GUI provides an easy-to-use platform for aligning multiple streams of data. As shown in Figure 3, chest taps provide a clearly identifiable artifact in all data modalities (INS, smart watches, videos) that can be used in manual alignment. The GUI was a useful means of aligning the data, but this could be exchanged for any other alignment tool that researchers would like to use. In some instances, the data streams have a slight drift. A potential future solution to this problem would be to divide the session data into different trials, each with its own chest tap sequence. Each trial can then be individually aligned to minimize the impact of drift.
Zero-normalized cross correlation (ZNCC) time alignment
The method for ZNCC works well in some cases but it has a few critical vulnerabilities. For example, for some movements, the two accelerometer signals can be phase shifted with respect to one another. If a phase aligned and phase shifted movement are both included in the analyzed epochs, then the ZNCC can have either multiple or even no clear peak. The normalization of ZNCC allows these alignments to be automatically identified and discarded as needed. This method works best if both signals are relatively noise free and windowed to an epoch with large, synchronized effects in both traces. The best results were achieved when the patient was asked to perform a series of strong taps with both hands against their chest. In practice however, manual verification of automated alignment was necessary for enough cases that the advantage of using the automated method was negligible.
Data quality
Data loss during automated transfer was negligible since the data transfer protocol process backs up raw copies to ensure that any losses are recoverable. Data loss from connectivity issues occurred regularly, since Bluetooth and radio frequency sometimes have unexpected connection dropouts and are range limited. Short gaps of up to 2 seconds occurred approximately a few times per hour, and longer gaps of up to 2 minutes occurred approximately once every couple of hours. Beyond data loss, significant stimulation artifacts were observed in neural data, the severity of which depended on the recording and the stimulation groups chosen. The largest artifacts occur near the stimulation frequency, well outside ranges of interest. No artifacts were observed in data from smart watches. Videos were recorded at a constant frame rate; however duplicate frames were identified in videos. This yielded an actual frame rate to be a few frames less than the theoretical frame rate as stated by the webcam specifications. More noticeable than the duplicate frames however were freezing periods that were identified in videos at varying intervals depending on the recording day. Freeze periods of approximately 10 frames or less were regularly observed; however longer sections of approximately 2 to 30 seconds long were also observed at irregular periods.
Longitudinal data collection
Table 1 shows the data that the platform prototype has periodically collected over the course of 1.5 years. In that time, hundreds of hours of data were collected, with a total of 293 hours of INS data across both sides of the body, 224 hours of smart watch data for both watches, and 2,037 hours of video data across three webcams. This demonstrates that the platform supports at-home data collection over extended periods of time while offering a rare opportunity to observe longitudinal changes in neural data and corresponding stimulation requirements.
| Data Type | Total Duration (hh:mm:ss) | Total Days | Storage Size |
| Neural | 293:17:33 | 90 | 28.94 GB |
| Watch | 224:06:05 | 89 | 35.67 GB |
| Video | 2037:06:11 | 228 | 146,073.77 GB |
Table 1: Longitudinal overview of collected data. The deployed platform collected data during several experiments over the course of 1.5 years. Approximately 90 days were recorded with neural, video, and smart watch data streams being collected.
2D and 3D pose estimates
Several pose estimation software packages are now available. Pose estimation was tested using OpenPose, an open-source software package21. This was successfully installed following the documentation provided by the organization's GitHub, as well as many other unofficial tutorials found on the web. The processing time for OpenPose varies significantly based on how the OpenPose library and its extensive dependencies are installed, the size of the GPU used, and whether the optional hands and face key points are processed. 2D pose was relatively easy to implement, however 3D pose was notably more difficult and preliminary 3D results yielded inconsistent quality equal to that of 2D pose. The low-quality 3D pose estimation may have been impacted negatively by suboptimal camera calibration, periods where camera autofocus was erroneously turned on, or inherent in the OpenPose software itself. However, synchronized high-quality videos from multiple angles may provide rich inputs for a variety of available pose estimation software packages. It is recommended that a test setup be completed outside of the patient's home, with manual benchmarking of different available pose estimation software packages.
Supplementary Figure 1: Video frame lag analysis. Lags in timestamps generated from the video recording app were detected during system characterization. To investigate the cause of the lags, the frame number and timestamp generated from each camera was determined by recording a red LED light that blinked at random intervals, then the variations in timestamp lags across cameras was computed. (Top) LED intensities (in RGB units) measured on each of the three cameras, demonstrating the time offsets observed between the three cameras (denoted with red arrows). (Bottom) Three plots show the between-camera timestamp lags in number of frames for a series of LED blinks over the entire recording. Each recording was broken up into multiple segments and the frame lag was approximately constant over time. Please click here to download this File.
Supplementary File 1: Video frame and timestamp analysis method. Please click here to download this File.