MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223622676 · doi:10.2196/35600

Wearables in Schizophrenia: Update on Current and Future Clinical Applications

2022· review· en· W4223622676 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lakshan N Fonseka, Benjamin K.P. Woo

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Wearable computerWearable technologyPopulationPsychiatryPsychosisMedicineParanoiaPsychologyClinical psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Schizophrenia affects 1% of the world population and is associated with a reduction in life expectancy of 20 years. The increasing prevalence of both consumer technology and clinical-grade wearable technology offers new metrics to guide clinical decision-making remotely and in real time. Herein, recent literature is reviewed to determine the potential utility of wearables in schizophrenia, including their utility in diagnosis, first-episode psychosis, and relapse prevention and their acceptability to patients. Several studies have further confirmed the validity of various devices in their ability to track sleep-an especially useful metric in schizophrenia, as sleep disturbances may be predictive of disease onset or the acute worsening of psychotic symptoms. Through machine learning, wearable-obtained heart rate and motor activity were used to differentiate between controls and patients with schizophrenia. Wearables can capture the autonomic dysregulation that has been detected when patients are actively experiencing paranoia, hallucinations, or delusions. Multiple platforms are currently being researched, such as Health Outcomes Through Positive Engagement and Self-Empowerment, Mobile Therapeutic Attention for Treatment-Resistant Schizophrenia, and Sleepsight, that may ultimately link patient data to clinicians. The future is bright for wearables in schizophrenia, as the recent literature exemplifies their potential to offer real-time insights to guide diagnosis and management.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.187
GPT teacher head0.546
Teacher spread0.359 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations38
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207