MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323652724 · doi:10.2196/43777

Remote Monitoring of Physiology in People Living With Dementia: An Observational Cohort Study

2023· article· en· W4323652724 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Aging · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUK Dementia Research InstituteMedical Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsDementiaContext (archaeology)Blood pressureMedicineCohortObservational studyCohort studyGerontologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Internet of Things (IoT) technology enables physiological measurements to be recorded at home from people living with dementia and monitored remotely. However, measurements from people with dementia in this context have not been previously studied. We report on the distribution of physiological measurements from 82 people with dementia over approximately 2 years. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to characterize the physiology of people with dementia when measured in the context of their own homes. We also wanted to explore the possible use of an alerts-based system for detecting health deterioration and discuss the potential applications and limitations of this kind of system. METHODS: We performed a longitudinal community-based cohort study of people with dementia using "Minder," our IoT remote monitoring platform. All people with dementia received a blood pressure machine for systolic and diastolic blood pressure, a pulse oximeter measuring oxygen saturation and heart rate, body weight scales, and a thermometer, and were asked to use each device once a day at any time. Timings, distributions, and abnormalities in measurements were examined, including the rate of significant abnormalities ("alerts") defined by various standardized criteria. We used our own study criteria for alerts and compared them with the National Early Warning Score 2 criteria. RESULTS: A total of 82 people with dementia, with a mean age of 80.4 (SD 7.8) years, recorded 147,203 measurements over 958,000 participant-hours. The median percentage of days when any participant took any measurements (ie, any device) was 56.2% (IQR 33.2%-83.7%, range 2.3%-100%). Reassuringly, engagement of people with dementia with the system did not wane with time, reflected in there being no change in the weekly number of measurements with respect to time (1-sample t-test on slopes of linear fit, P=.45). A total of 45% of people with dementia met criteria for hypertension. People with dementia with α-synuclein-related dementia had lower systolic blood pressure; 30% had clinically significant weight loss. Depending on the criteria used, 3.03%-9.46% of measurements generated alerts, at 0.066-0.233 per day per person with dementia. We also report 4 case studies, highlighting the potential benefits and challenges of remote physiological monitoring in people with dementia. These include case studies of people with dementia developing acute infections and one of a person with dementia developing symptomatic bradycardia while taking donepezil. CONCLUSIONS: We present findings from a study of the physiology of people with dementia recorded remotely on a large scale. People with dementia and their carers showed acceptable compliance throughout, supporting the feasibility of the system. Our findings inform the development of technologies, care pathways, and policies for IoT-based remote monitoring. We show how IoT-based monitoring could improve the management of acute and chronic comorbidities in this clinically vulnerable group. Future randomized trials are required to establish if a system like this has measurable long-term benefits on health and quality of life outcomes.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.639

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.252 · 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