Capturing Rest-Activity Profiles in Schizophrenia Using Wearable and Mobile Technologies: Development, Implementation, Feasibility, and Acceptability of a Remote Monitoring Platform
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in the potential for wearable and mobile devices to deliver clinically relevant information in real-world contexts. However, there is limited information on their acceptability and barriers to long-term use in people living with psychosis. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the development, implementation, feasibility, acceptability, and user experiences of the Sleepsight platform, which harnesses consumer wearable devices and smartphones for the passive and unobtrusive capture of sleep and rest-activity profiles in people with schizophrenia living in their homes. METHODS: A total of 15 outpatients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia used a consumer wrist-worn device and smartphone to continuously and remotely gather rest-activity profiles over 2 months. Once-daily sleep and self-rated symptom diaries were also collected via a smartphone app. Adherence with the devices and smartphone app, end-of-study user experiences, and agreement between subjective and objective sleep measures were analyzed. Thresholds for acceptability were set at a wear time or diary response rate of 70% or greater. RESULTS: Overall, 14 out of 15 participants completed the study. In individuals with a mild to moderate symptom severity at baseline (mean total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale score 58.4 [SD 14.4]), we demonstrated high rates of engagement with the wearable device (all participants meeting acceptability criteria), sleep diary, and symptom diary (93% and 86% meeting criteria, respectively), with negative symptoms being associated with lower diary completion rate. The end-of-study usability and acceptability questionnaire and qualitative analysis identified facilitators and barriers to long-term use, and paranoia with study devices was not a significant barrier to engagement. Comparison between sleep diary and wearable estimated sleep times showed good correspondence (ρ=0.50, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Extended use of wearable and mobile technologies are acceptable to people with schizophrenia living in a community setting. In the future, these technologies may allow predictive, objective markers of clinical status, including early markers of impending relapse.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".