Digital phenotyping by wearable-driven artificial intelligence in older adults and people with Parkinson’s disease: Protocol of the mixed method, cyclic ActiveAgeing study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Active ageing is described as the process of optimizing health, empowerment, and security to enhance the quality of life in the rapidly growing population of older adults. Meanwhile, multimorbidity and neurological disorders, such as Parkinson's disease (PD), lead to global public health and resource limitations. We introduce a novel user-centered paradigm of ageing based on wearable-driven artificial intelligence (AI) that may harness the autonomy and independence that accompany functional limitation or disability, and possibly elevate life expectancy in older adults and people with PD. METHODS: ActiveAgeing is a 4-year, multicentre, mixed method, cyclic study that combines digital phenotyping via commercial devices (Empatica E4, Fitbit Sense, and Oura Ring) with traditional evaluation (clinical assessment scales, in-depth interviews, and clinical consultations) and includes four types of participants: (1) people with PD and (2) their informal caregiver; (3) healthy older adults from the Helgetun living environment in Norway, and (4) people on the Helgetun waiting list. For the first study, each group will be represented by N = 15 participants to test the data acquisition and to determine the sample size for the second study. To suggest lifestyle changes, modules for human expert-based advice, machine-generated advice, and self-generated advice from accessible data visualization will be designed. Quantitative analysis of physiological data will rely on digital signal processing (DSP) and AI techniques. The clinical assessment scales are the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS), Geriatric Anxiety Inventory (GAI), Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES), and the REM Sleep Behaviour Disorder Screening Questionnaire (RBDSQ). A qualitative inquiry will be carried out with individual and focus group interviews and analysed using a hermeneutic approach including narrative and thematic analysis techniques. DISCUSSION: We hypothesise that digital phenotyping is feasible to explore the ageing process from clinical and lifestyle perspectives including older adults and people with PD. Data is used for clinical decision-making by symptom tracking, predicting symptom evolution, and discovering new outcome measures for clinical trials.
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 | 0.021 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.006 |
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".