Dissecting the heterogeneity of “in the wild” stress from multimodal sensor data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stress is associated with numerous chronic health conditions, both mental and physical. However, the heterogeneity of these associations at the individual level is poorly understood. While data generated from individuals in their day-to-day lives "in the wild" may best represent the heterogeneity of stress, gathering these data and separating signals from noise is challenging. In this work, we report findings from a major data collection effort using Digital Health Technologies (DHTs) and frontline healthcare workers. We provide insights into stress "in the wild", by using robust methods for its identification from multimodal data and quantifying its heterogeneity. Here we analyze data from the Stress and Recovery in Frontline COVID-19 Workers study following 365 frontline healthcare workers for 4-6 months using wearable devices and smartphone app-based measures. Causal discovery is used to learn how the causal structure governing an individual's self-reported symptoms and physiological features from DHTs differs between non-stress and potential stress states. Our methods uncover robust representations of potential stress states across a population of frontline healthcare workers. These representations reveal high levels of inter- and intra-individual heterogeneity in stress. We leverage multiple stress definitions that span different modalities (from subjective to physiological) to obtain a comprehensive view of stress, as these differing definitions rarely align in time. We show that these different stress definitions can be robustly represented as changes in the underlying causal structure on and off stress for individuals. This study is an important step toward better understanding potential underlying processes generating stress in individuals.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".