Associations Between Physiological Signals Captured Using Wearable Sensors and Self-reported Outcomes Among Adults in Alcohol Use Disorder Recovery: Development and Usability Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous research has highlighted the role of stress in substance misuse and addiction, particularly for relapse risk. Mobile health interventions that incorporate real-time monitoring of physiological markers of stress offer promise for delivering tailored interventions to individuals during high-risk states of heightened stress to prevent alcohol relapse. Before such interventions can be developed, measurements of these processes in ambulatory, real-world settings are needed. OBJECTIVE: This research is a proof-of-concept study to establish the feasibility of using a wearable sensor device to continuously monitor stress in an ambulatory setting. Toward that end, we first aimed to examine the quality of 2 continuously monitored physiological signals-electrodermal activity (EDA) and heart rate variability (HRV)-and show that the data follow standard quality measures according to the literature. Next, we examined the associations between the statistical features extracted from the EDA and HRV signals and self-reported outcomes. METHODS: Participants (N=11; female: n=10) were asked to wear an Empatica E4 wearable sensor for continuous unobtrusive physiological signal collection for up to 14 days. During the same time frame, participants responded to a daily diary study using ecological momentary assessment of self-reported stress, emotions, alcohol-related cravings, pain, and discomfort via a web-based survey, which was conducted 4 times daily. Participants also participated in structured interviews throughout the study to assess daily alcohol use and to validate self-reported and physiological stress markers. In the analysis, we first used existing artifact detection methods and physiological signal processing approaches to assess the quality of the physiological data. Next, we examined the descriptive statistics for self-reported outcomes. Finally, we investigated the associations between the features of physiological signals and self-reported outcomes. RESULTS: We determined that 87.86% (1,032,265/1,174,898) of the EDA signals were clean. A comparison of the frequency of skin conductance responses per minute with previous research confirmed that the physiological signals collected in the ambulatory setting were successful. The results also indicated that the statistical features of the EDA and HRV measures were significantly correlated with the self-reported outcomes, including the number of stressful events marked on the sensor device, positive and negative emotions, and experienced pain and discomfort. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrated that the physiological data collected via an Empatica E4 wearable sensor device were consistent with previous literature in terms of the quality of the data and that features of these physiological signals were significantly associated with several self-reported outcomes among a sample of adults diagnosed with alcohol use disorder. These results suggest that ambulatory assessment of stress is feasible and can be used to develop tailored mobile health interventions to enhance sustained recovery from alcohol use disorder.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".