Detection of Clenbuterol-Induced Changes in Heart Rate Using At-Home Recorded Smartwatch Data: Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although electrocardiography is the gold standard for heart rate (HR) recording in clinical trials, the increasing availability of smartwatch-based HR monitors opens up possibilities for drug development studies. Smartwatches allow for inexpensive, unobtrusive, and continuous HR estimation for potential detection of treatment effects outside the clinic, during daily life. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the repeatability and sensitivity of smartwatch-based HR estimates collected during a randomized clinical trial. METHODS: The data were collected as part of a multiple-dose, investigator-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study of 12 patients with Parkinson disease. After a 6-day baseline period, 4 and 8 patients were treated for 7 days with an ascending dose of placebo and clenbuterol, respectively. Throughout the study, the smartwatch provided HR and sleep state estimates. The HR estimates were quantified as the 2.5th, 50th, and 97.5th percentiles within awake and asleep segments. Linear mixed models were used to calculate the following: (1) the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of estimated sleep durations, (2) the ICC and minimum detectable effect (MDE) of the HR estimates, and (3) the effect sizes of the HR estimates. RESULTS: Sleep duration was moderately repeatable (ICC=0.64) and was not significantly affected by study day (P=.83), clenbuterol (P=.43), and study day by clenbuterol (P=.73). Clenbuterol-induced changes were detected in the asleep HR as of the first night (+3.79 beats per minute [bpm], P=.04) and in the awake HR as of the third day (+8.79 bpm, P=.001). The median HR while asleep had the highest repeatability (ICC=0.70). The MDE (N=12) was found to be smaller when patients were asleep (6.8 bpm to 11.7 bpm) than while awake (10.7 bpm to 22.1 bpm). Overall, the effect sizes for clenbuterol-induced changes were higher while asleep (0.49 to 2.75) than while awake (0.08 to 1.94). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated the feasibility of using smartwatch-based HR estimates to detect clenbuterol-induced changes during clinical trials. The asleep HR estimates were most repeatable and sensitive to treatment effects. We conclude that smartwatch-based HR estimates obtained during daily living in a clinical trial can be used to detect and track treatment effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trials Register NL8002; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8002.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".