MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4360585512 · doi:10.2196/44986

Associations Between Smartphone Keystroke Metadata and Mental Health Symptoms in Adolescents: Findings From the Future Proofing Study

2023· article· en· W4360585512 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Taylor A. Braund, Bridianne O’Dea, Debopriyo Bal, Kate Maston, Mark Larsen, Aliza Werner‐Seidler, Gabriel Tillman, Helen Christensen

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Mental Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilDeakin University
KeywordsMental healthKeystroke loggingAnxietyClinical psychologyPsychologyMedicinePsychiatryComputer scienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mental disorders are prevalent during adolescence. Among the digital phenotypes currently being developed to monitor mental health symptoms, typing behavior is one promising candidate. However, few studies have directly assessed associations between typing behavior and mental health symptom severity, and whether these relationships differs between genders. OBJECTIVE: In a cross-sectional analysis of a large cohort, we tested whether various features of typing behavior derived from keystroke metadata were associated with mental health symptoms and whether these relationships differed between genders. METHODS: A total of 934 adolescents from the Future Proofing study undertook 2 typing tasks on their smartphones through the Future Proofing app. Common keystroke timing and frequency features were extracted across tasks. Mental health symptoms were assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-Adolescent version, the Children's Anxiety Scale-Short Form, the Distress Questionnaire 5, and the Insomnia Severity Index. Bivariate correlations were used to test whether keystroke features were associated with mental health symptoms. The false discovery rates of P values were adjusted to q values. Machine learning models were trained and tested using independent samples (ie, 80% train 20% test) to identify whether keystroke features could be combined to predict mental health symptoms. RESULTS: Keystroke timing features showed a weak negative association with mental health symptoms across participants. When split by gender, females showed weak negative relationships between keystroke timing features and mental health symptoms, and weak positive relationships between keystroke frequency features and mental health symptoms. The opposite relationships were found for males (except for dwell). Machine learning models using keystroke features alone did not predict mental health symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Increased mental health symptoms are weakly associated with faster typing, with important gender differences. Keystroke metadata should be collected longitudinally and combined with other digital phenotypes to enhance their clinical relevance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, ACTRN12619000855123; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=377664&isReview=true.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Mental HealthSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207