The Apple Watch for Monitoring Mental Health–Related Physiological Symptoms: Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An anticipated surge in mental health service demand related to COVID-19 has motivated the use of novel methods of care to meet demand, given workforce limitations. Digital health technologies in the form of self-tracking technology have been identified as a potential avenue, provided sufficient evidence exists to support their effectiveness in mental health contexts. OBJECTIVE: This literature review aims to identify current and potential physiological or physiologically related monitoring capabilities of the Apple Watch relevant to mental health monitoring and examine the accuracy and validation status of these measures and their implications for mental health treatment. METHODS: A literature review was conducted from June 2021 to July 2021 of both published and gray literature pertaining to the Apple Watch, mental health, and physiology. The literature review identified studies validating the sensor capabilities of the Apple Watch. RESULTS: A total of 5583 paper titles were identified, with 115 (2.06%) reviewed in full. Of these 115 papers, 19 (16.5%) were related to Apple Watch validation or comparison studies. Most studies showed that the Apple Watch could measure heart rate acceptably with increased errors in case of movement. Accurate energy expenditure measurements are difficult for most wearables, with the Apple Watch generally providing the best results compared with peers, despite overestimation. Heart rate variability measurements were found to have gaps in data but were able to detect mild mental stress. Activity monitoring with step counting showed good agreement, although wheelchair use was found to be prone to overestimation and poor performance on overground tasks. Atrial fibrillation detection showed mixed results, in part because of a high inconclusive result rate, but may be useful for ongoing monitoring. No studies recorded validation of the Sleep app feature; however, accelerometer-based sleep monitoring showed high accuracy and sensitivity in detecting sleep. CONCLUSIONS: The results are encouraging regarding the application of the Apple Watch in mental health, particularly as heart rate variability is a key indicator of changes in both physical and emotional states. Particular benefits may be derived through avoidance of recall bias and collection of supporting ecological context data. However, a lack of methodologically robust and replicated evidence of user benefit, a supportive health economic analysis, and concerns about personal health information remain key factors that must be addressed to enable broader uptake.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".