Identifying Game-Based Digital Biomarkers of Cognitive Risk for Adolescent Substance Misuse: Protocol for a Proof-of-Concept Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adolescents at risk for substance misuse are rarely identified early due to existing barriers to screening that include the lack of time and privacy in clinic settings. Games can be used for screening and thus mitigate these barriers. Performance in a game is influenced by cognitive processes such as working memory and inhibitory control. Deficits in these cognitive processes can increase the risk of substance use. Further, substance misuse affects these cognitive processes and may influence game performance, captured by in-game metrics such as reaction time or time for task completion. Digital biomarkers are measures generated from digital tools that explain underlying health processes and can be used to predict, identify, and monitor health outcomes. As such, in-game performance metrics may represent digital biomarkers of cognitive processes that can offer an objective method for assessing underlying risk for substance misuse. OBJECTIVE: This is a protocol for a proof-of-concept study to investigate the utility of in-game performance metrics as digital biomarkers of cognitive processes implicated in the development of substance misuse. METHODS: This study has 2 aims. In aim 1, using previously collected data from 166 adolescents aged 11-14 years, we extracted in-game performance metrics from a video game and are using machine learning methods to determine whether these metrics predict substance misuse. The extraction of in-game performance metrics was guided by literature review of in-game performance metrics and gameplay guidebooks provided by the game developers. In aim 2, using data from a new sample of 30 adolescents playing the same video game, we will test if metrics identified in aim 1 correlate with cognitive processes. Our hypothesis is that in-game performance metrics that are predictive of substance misuse in aim 1 will correlate with poor cognitive function in our second sample. RESULTS: This study was funded by National Institute on Drug Abuse through the Center for Technology and Behavioral Health Pilot Core in May 2022. To date, we have extracted 285 in-game performance metrics. We obtained institutional review board approval on October 11, 2022. Data collection for aim 2 is ongoing and projected to end in February 2024. Currently, we have enrolled 12 participants. Data analysis for aim 2 will begin once data collection is completed. The results from both aims will be reported in a subsequent publication, expected to be published in late 2024. CONCLUSIONS: Screening adolescents for substance use is not consistently done due to barriers that include the lack of time. Using games that provide an objective measure to identify adolescents at risk for substance misuse can increase screening rates, early identification, and intervention. The results will inform the utility of in-game performance metrics as digital biomarkers for identifying adolescents at high risk for substance misuse. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/46990.
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 | 0.032 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.012 |
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".