Digital Biomarkers for Depression Screening With Wearable Devices: Cross-sectional Study With Machine Learning Modeling
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Depression is a prevalent mental disorder that is undiagnosed and untreated in half of all cases. Wearable activity trackers collect fine-grained sensor data characterizing the behavior and physiology of users (ie, digital biomarkers), which could be used for timely, unobtrusive, and scalable depression screening. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the predictive ability of digital biomarkers, based on sensor data from consumer-grade wearables, to detect risk of depression in a working population. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of 290 healthy working adults. Participants wore Fitbit Charge 2 devices for 14 consecutive days and completed a health survey, including screening for depressive symptoms using the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), at baseline and 2 weeks later. We extracted a range of known and novel digital biomarkers characterizing physical activity, sleep patterns, and circadian rhythms from wearables using steps, heart rate, energy expenditure, and sleep data. Associations between severity of depressive symptoms and digital biomarkers were examined with Spearman correlation and multiple regression analyses adjusted for potential confounders, including sociodemographic characteristics, alcohol consumption, smoking, self-rated health, subjective sleep characteristics, and loneliness. Supervised machine learning with statistically selected digital biomarkers was used to predict risk of depression (ie, symptom severity and screening status). We used varying cutoff scores from an acceptable PHQ-9 score range to define the depression group and different subsamples for classification, while the set of statistically selected digital biomarkers remained the same. For the performance evaluation, we used k-fold cross-validation and obtained accuracy measures from the holdout folds. RESULTS: A total of 267 participants were included in the analysis. The mean age of the participants was 33 (SD 8.6, range 21-64) years. Out of 267 participants, there was a mild female bias displayed (n=170, 63.7%). The majority of the participants were Chinese (n=211, 79.0%), single (n=163, 61.0%), and had a university degree (n=238, 89.1%). We found that a greater severity of depressive symptoms was robustly associated with greater variation of nighttime heart rate between 2 AM and 4 AM and between 4 AM and 6 AM; it was also associated with lower regularity of weekday circadian rhythms based on steps and estimated with nonparametric measures of interdaily stability and autocorrelation as well as fewer steps-based daily peaks. Despite several reliable associations, our evidence showed limited ability of digital biomarkers to detect depression in the whole sample of working adults. However, in balanced and contrasted subsamples comprised of depressed and healthy participants with no risk of depression (ie, no or minimal depressive symptoms), the model achieved an accuracy of 80%, a sensitivity of 82%, and a specificity of 78% in detecting subjects at high risk of depression. CONCLUSIONS: Digital biomarkers that have been discovered and are based on behavioral and physiological data from consumer wearables could detect increased risk of depression and have the potential to assist in depression screening, yet current evidence shows limited predictive ability. Machine learning models combining these digital biomarkers could discriminate between individuals with a high risk of depression and individuals with no risk.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it