Applying AI in the Context of the Association Between Device-Based Assessment of Physical Activity and Mental Health: Systematic Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Wearable technology is used by consumers worldwide for continuous activity monitoring in daily life but more recently also for classifying or predicting mental health parameters like stress or depression levels. Previous studies identified, based on traditional approaches, that physical activity is a relevant factor in the prevention or management of mental health. However, upcoming artificial intelligence methods have not yet been fully established in the research field of physical activity and mental health. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of studies that integrated passive monitoring of physical activity data measured via wearable technology in machine learning algorithms for the detection, prediction, or classification of mental health states and traits. METHODS: We conducted a review of studies processing wearable data to gain insights into mental health parameters. Eligibility criteria were (1) the study uses wearables or smartphones to acquire physical behavior and optionally other sensor measurement data, (2) the study must use machine learning to process the acquired data, and (3) the study had to be published in a peer-reviewed English language journal. Studies were identified via a systematic search in 5 electronic databases. RESULTS: Of 11,057 unique search results, 49 published papers between 2016 and 2023 were included. Most studies examined the connection between wearable sensor data and stress (n=15, 31%) or depression (n=14, 29%). In total, 71% (n=35) of the studies had less than 100 participants, and 47% (n=23) had less than 14 days of data recording. More than half of the studies (n=27, 55%) used step count as movement measurement, and 44% (n=21) used raw accelerometer values. The quality of the studies was assessed, scoring between 0 and 18 points in 9 categories (maximum 2 points per category). On average, studies were rated 6.47 (SD 3.1) points. CONCLUSIONS: The use of wearable technology for the detection, prediction, or classification of mental health states and traits is promising and offers a variety of applications across different settings and target groups. However, based on the current state of literature, the application of artificial intelligence cannot realize its full potential mostly due to a lack of methodological shortcomings and data availability. Future research endeavors may focus on the following suggestions to improve the quality of new applications in this context: first, by using raw data instead of already preprocessed data. Second, by using only relevant data based on empirical evidence. In particular, crafting optimal feature sets rather than using many individual detached features and consultation with in-field professionals. Third, by validating and replicating the existing approaches (ie, applying the model to unseen data). Fourth, depending on the research aim (ie, generalization vs personalization) maximizing the sample size or the duration over which data are collected.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,010 | 0,064 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,010 | 0,010 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,012 | 0,012 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».