Identifying patient-specific behaviors to understand illness trajectories and predict relapses in bipolar disorder using passive sensing and deep anomaly detection: protocol for a contactless cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Predictive models for mental disorders or behaviors (e.g., suicide) have been successfully developed at the level of populations, yet current demographic and clinical variables are neither sensitive nor specific enough for making individual clinical predictions. Forecasting episodes of illness is particularly relevant in bipolar disorder (BD), a mood disorder with high recurrence, disability, and suicide rates. Thus, to understand the dynamic changes involved in episode generation in BD, we propose to extract and interpret individual illness trajectories and patterns suggestive of relapse using passive sensing, nonlinear techniques, and deep anomaly detection. Here we describe the study we have designed to test this hypothesis and the rationale for its design. METHOD: This is a protocol for a contactless cohort study in 200 adult BD patients. Participants will be followed for up to 2 years during which they will be monitored continuously using passive sensing, a wearable that collects multimodal physiological (heart rate variability) and objective (sleep, activity) data. Participants will complete (i) a comprehensive baseline assessment; (ii) weekly assessments; (iii) daily assessments using electronic rating scales. Data will be analyzed using nonlinear techniques and deep anomaly detection to forecast episodes of illness. DISCUSSION: This proposed contactless, large cohort study aims to obtain and combine high-dimensional, multimodal physiological, objective, and subjective data. Our work, by conceptualizing mood as a dynamic property of biological systems, will demonstrate the feasibility of incorporating individual variability in a model informing clinical trajectories and predicting relapse in BD.
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 | 0.011 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.005 |
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".