MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

P2477Assessing self-measurement, activity, and weight change behaviors of connected scale users who reduced their pulse wave velocity over 4 months

2017· article· en· W2760922914 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eva Roitmann, Angela Chieh

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Research Topics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePulse wave velocityScale (ratio)Pulse (music)Pulse Wave AnalysisInternal medicineOpticsBlood pressurePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Pulse wave velocity (PWV) is widely known as a marker of cardiovascular risk. As a preventive measure against cardiovascular events it is desirable to reduce the PWV. While there are many cross-sectional analyses describing the association between cardiovascular risk and PWV, little research has evaluated longitudinal changes and the behaviors associated with a PWV reduction. PWV measurements have until recently been limited mostly to research and medical centers because measurements required the use of expensive and complex devices. The new connected scales that permit self-measurement of the PWV makes it possible to analyze the PWV of large cohorts with a high measurement frequency. Purpose: The study aims to leverage the availability of high-frequency PWV self-measurements of a large number of connected scale users to determine the behaviors of users who reduce their pulse wave velocity over the course of 4 months. Methods: The study was conducted on anonymous data from a pool of 99,327 users of connected scales that measure both weight and PWV. 59,497 of these users also track their daily steps with wearable activity trackers. The data was collected from August to December 2016 worldwide with more than 90% of users from US, Canada, Europe, Japan, and China. To identify users that had reduced their PWV we calculated the percent change in PWV between August and December averages and set a threshold of -10%. We used a Welch's t-test for evaluating whether there was a difference in the levels of self-measurement and activity between users who reduced their PWV and other users. To evaluate the difference in weight change from August to December between users who reduced their PWV and other users we performed a linear regression for each group and compared the slopes with a Student t-test.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.250
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.174 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicMental Health Research Topics→French-language works237,207→