convenience; for this reason, the results have to be
analysed carefully because they are not generalizable
to the population.
From the two forms design to the analysis of
results, the reliability considers how the evidence
chain was carried out to respect the data's literality.
Moreover, the qualitative responses were quantified
using a Likert scale to avoid introducing
interpretation bias or, failing that, the participants
mentioned textually.
5 CONCLUSIONS AND
FURTHER WORK
This paper allows the determination of variables'
values to determine active aging. Data mining allows
identifying among variables that are strongly
associated with the topic. Data recollected from
different sources in the psychological tests as mental,
physical, social, policy health, and personal behavior
(Fernandez-Ballesteros, 2011), these variables are
matched with variables of models proposed by the
WHO and Neuropsychologists (Nayak, Buys, &
Lovie-Kitchin, 2006).
The multiple models for measuring and
evaluating individuals' active aging have allowed
creating this framework to identify the appropriate
methods of active aging. Moreover, the proper
techniques to analyze them into each data mining
process: LikertSvm for Likert scale values, listwise
deletion for missing values, standardized data
discretization for sociodemographic variables
according to their categorization in health care.
Then, according to the input data and literature, a
clustering technique is proper to evaluate the groups
of active aging in the next stage of modeling.
However, the data scientists have to perform a
performance evaluation of clusters using metrics or
visual analytic analysis to get the best precision in
splitting groups.
Due to it not being a standardized technique o
evaluation to identify active aging, it is impossible to
classify the people in the two groups who have
successful aging among those who do not. Thus, the
number of variables to consider is significant, so
determining which are related is essential to open a
path to active aging.
After implementing the proposed framework and
getting results, we seek to report results after applying
different data science techniques.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to thank the Vice-Rector for
Research of the University of Azuay for the financial
and academic support and all the staff of the
Laboratory for Research and Development in
Informatics (LIDI), and the Department of Computer
Science of Universidad de Cuenca.
REFERENCES
Ariza Colpas, P., Vicario, E., De-La-Hoz-Franco, E.,
Pineres-Melo, M., Oviedo-Carrascal, A., & Patara, F.
(2020). Unsupervised Human Activity Recognition
Using the Clustering Approach: A Review. Sensors,
20(9), 2702. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20092702
Baltes, P. B., & Baltes, M. M. (2010). 成功衰老的心理学
观点:有偿的选择性优化模型. In Successful aging.
Basili, V. R., Caldiera, G., & Rombach, H. D. (1994). The
goal question metric approach. Encyclopedia of
Software Engineering, 2, 528–532.
https://doi.org/10.1.1.104.8626
Brummel-Smith, K. (2007). Optimal aging, part II:
Evidence-based practical steps to achieve it.
Chapman, P., Clinton, J., Kerber, R., Khabaza, T., Reinartz,
T., Shearer, C., Wirth, R., & others. (2000). CRISP-DM
1.0: Step-by-step data mining guide. SPSS Inc, 9, 13.
Chen, W., Guo, F., & Wang, F. (2015). A Survey of Traffic
Data Visualization. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent
Transportation Systems, 16(6), 2970–2984.
https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2015.2436897
Davis, F. (1985). A technology acceptance model for
empirically testing new end-user information systems:
Theory and results [Massachusetts Institute of
Technology]. In Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
https://doi.org/oclc/56932490
Enders, C. K. (2010). Applied missing data analysis.
Guilford press.
Fabila Echauri, A. M., Minami, H., & Izquierdo Sandoval,
M. J. (2013). La Escala de Likert en la evaluación
docente : acercamiento a sus características y principios
metodológicos. Textos y Contextos, 31–40.
Fernandez-Ballesteros, R. (2011). Positive ageing.
Objective, subjective, and combined outcomes. EJAP
(Test), 7(1), 22–30.
Fleiss, J. L. (1971). Measuring nominal scale agreement
among many raters. Psychological Bulletin, 76(5), 378–
382. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031619
Gachet Páez, D., de Buenaga Rodríguez, M., Puertas Sánz,
E., Villalba, M. T., & Muñoz Gil, R. (2018). Healthy
and wellbeing activities’ promotion using a Big Data
approach. Health Informatics Journal, 24(2), 125–135.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458216660754
Kandasamy, I., Kandasamy, W. B. V., Obbineni, J. M., &
Smarandache, F. (2020). Indeterminate Likert scale:
feedback based on neutrosophy, its distance measures