Predicting Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder Events in Children and Adolescents in the Wild Using a Wearable Biosensor (Wrist Angel): Protocol for the Analysis Plan of a Nonrandomized Pilot Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Physiological signals such as heart rate and electrodermal activity can provide insight into an individual's mental state, which are invaluable information for mental health care. Using recordings of physiological signals from wearable devices in the wild can facilitate objective monitoring of symptom severity and evaluation of treatment progress. OBJECTIVE: We designed a study to evaluate the feasibility of predicting obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) events from physiological signals recorded using wrist-worn devices in the wild. Here, we present an analysis plan for the study to document our a priori hypotheses and increase the robustness of the findings of our planned study. METHODS: In total, 18 children and adolescents aged between 8 and 16 years were included in this study. Nine outpatients with an OCD diagnosis were recruited from a child and adolescent mental health center. Nine youths without a psychiatric diagnosis were recruited from the catchment area. Patients completed a clinical interview to assess OCD severity, types of OCD, and number of OCD symptoms in the clinic. Participants wore a biosensor on their wrist for up to 8 weeks in their everyday lives. Patients were asked to press an event tag button on the biosensor when they were stressed by OCD symptoms. Participants without a psychiatric diagnosis were asked to press this button whenever they felt really scared. Before and after the 8-week observation period, participants wore the biosensor under controlled conditions of rest and stress in the clinic. Features are extracted from 4 different physiological signals within sliding windows to predict the distress event logged by participants during data collection. We will test the prediction models within participants across time and multiple participants. Model selection and estimation using 2-layer cross-validation are outlined for both scenarios. RESULTS: Participants were included between December 2021 and December 2022. Participants included 10 female and 8 male participants with an even sex distribution between groups. Patients were aged between 10 and 16 years, and adolescents without a psychiatric diagnosis were between the ages of 8 and 16 years. Most patients had moderate to moderate to severe OCD, except for 1 patient with mild OCD. CONCLUSIONS: The strength of the planned study is the investigation of predictions of OCD events in the wild. Major challenges of the study are the inherent noise of in-the-wild data and the lack of contextual knowledge associated with the recorded signals. This preregistered analysis plan discusses in detail how we plan to address these challenges and may help reduce interpretation bias of the upcoming results. If the obtained results from this study are promising, we will be closer to automated detection of OCD events outside of clinical experiments. This is an important tool for the assessment and treatment of OCD in youth. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05064527; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05064527. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/48571.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».