Measuring Daily Activity Rhythms in Young Adults at Risk of Affective Instability Using Passively Collected Smartphone Data: Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Irregularities in circadian rhythms have been associated with adverse health outcomes. The regularity of rhythms can be quantified using passively collected smartphone data to provide clinically relevant biomarkers of routine. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop a metric to quantify the regularity of activity rhythms and explore the relationship between routine and mood, as well as demographic covariates, in an outpatient psychiatric cohort. METHODS: Passively sensed smartphone data from a cohort of 38 young adults from the Penn or Children's Hospital of Philadelphia Lifespan Brain Institute and Outpatient Psychiatry Clinic at the University of Pennsylvania were fitted with 2-state continuous-time hidden Markov models representing active and resting states. The regularity of routine was modeled as the hour-of-the-day random effects on the probability of state transition (ie, the association between the hour-of-the-day and state membership). A regularity score, Activity Rhythm Metric, was calculated from the continuous-time hidden Markov models and regressed on clinical and demographic covariates. RESULTS: Regular activity rhythms were associated with longer sleep durations (P=.009), older age (P=.001), and mood (P=.049). CONCLUSIONS: Passively sensed Activity Rhythm Metrics are an alternative to existing metrics but do not require burdensome survey-based assessments. Low-burden, passively sensed metrics based on smartphone data are promising and scalable alternatives to traditional measurements.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".