MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288048593 · doi:10.2196/39532

Wearables for Measuring Health Effects of Climate Change–Induced Weather Extremes: Scoping Review

2022· article· en· W4288048593 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mara Koch, Ina Matzke, Sophie Huhn, Hanns‐Christian Gunga, Martina Anna Maggioni, Stephen Munga, David Obor, Ali Sié, Valentin Boudo, Aditi Bunker, Peter Dambach, Till Bärnighausen, Sandra Barteit

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScopusCINAHLWearable computerClimate changeMEDLINEGrey literatureSystematic reviewApplied psychologyComputer sciencePsychologyPolitical scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although climate change is one of the biggest global health threats, individual-level and short-term data on direct exposure and health impacts are still scarce. Wearable electronic devices (wearables) present a potential solution to this research gap. Wearables have become widely accepted in various areas of health research for ecological momentary assessment, and some studies have used wearables in the field of climate change and health. However, these studies vary in study design, demographics, and outcome variables, and existing research has not been mapped. OBJECTIVE: In this review, we aimed to map existing research on wearables used to detect direct health impacts and individual exposure during climate change-induced weather extremes, such as heat waves or wildfires. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review according to the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) framework and systematically searched 6 databases (PubMed [MEDLINE], IEEE Xplore, CINAHL [EBSCOhost], WoS, Scopus, Ovid [MEDLINE], and Google Scholar). The search yielded 1871 results. Abstracts and full texts were screened by 2 reviewers (MK and IM) independently using the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The inclusion criteria comprised studies published since 2010 that used off-the-shelf wearables that were neither invasive nor obtrusive to the user in the setting of climate change-related weather extremes. Data were charted using a structured form, and the study outcomes were narratively synthesized. RESULTS: The review included 55,284 study participants using wearables in 53 studies. Most studies were conducted in upper-middle-income and high-income countries (50/53, 94%) in urban environments (25/53, 47%) or in a climatic chamber (19/53, 36%) and assessed the health effects of heat exposure (52/53, 98%). The majority reported adverse health effects of heat exposure on sleep, physical activity, and heart rate. The remaining studies assessed occupational heat stress or compared individual- and area-level heat exposure. In total, 26% (14/53) of studies determined that all examined wearables were valid and reliable for measuring health parameters during heat exposure when compared with standard methods. CONCLUSIONS: Wearables have been used successfully in large-scale research to measure the health implications of climate change-related weather extremes. More research is needed in low-income countries and vulnerable populations with pre-existing conditions. In addition, further research could focus on the health impacts of other climate change-related conditions and the effectiveness of adaptation measures at the individual level to such weather extremes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.087
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.087
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.010
Bibliometrics0.0210.019
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.212
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
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

Citations44
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicClimate Change and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207