Benchmarking Mental Health Status Using Passive Sensor Data: Protocol for a Prospective Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Computational psychiatry has the potential to advance the diagnosis, mechanistic understanding, and treatment of mental health conditions. Promising results from clinical samples have led to calls to extend these methods to mental health risk assessment in the general public; however, data typically used with clinical samples are neither available nor scalable for research in the general population. Digital phenotyping addresses this by capitalizing on the multimodal and widely available data created by sensors embedded in personal digital devices (eg, smartphones) and is a promising approach to extending computational psychiatry methods to improve mental health risk assessment in the general population. OBJECTIVE: Building on recommendations from existing computational psychiatry and digital phenotyping work, we aim to create the first computational psychiatry data set that is tailored to studying mental health risk in the general population; includes multimodal, sensor-based behavioral features; and is designed to be widely shared across academia, industry, and government using gold standard methods for privacy, confidentiality, and data integrity. METHODS: We are using a stratified, random sampling design with 2 crossed factors (difficulties with emotion regulation and perceived life stress) to recruit a sample of 400 community-dwelling adults balanced across high- and low-risk for episodic mental health conditions. Participants first complete self-report questionnaires assessing current and lifetime psychiatric and medical diagnoses and treatment, and current psychosocial functioning. Participants then complete a 7-day in situ data collection phase that includes providing daily audio recordings, passive sensor data collected from smartphones, self-reports of daily mood and significant events, and a verbal description of the significant daily events during a nightly phone call. Participants complete the same baseline questionnaires 6 and 12 months after this phase. Self-report questionnaires will be scored using standard methods. Raw audio and passive sensor data will be processed to create a suite of daily summary features (eg, time spent at home). RESULTS: Data collection began in June 2022 and is expected to conclude by July 2024. To date, 310 participants have consented to the study; 149 have completed the baseline questionnaire and 7-day intensive data collection phase; and 61 and 31 have completed the 6- and 12-month follow-up questionnaires, respectively. Once completed, the proposed data set will be made available to academic researchers, industry, and the government using a stepped approach to maximize data privacy. CONCLUSIONS: This data set is designed as a complementary approach to current computational psychiatry and digital phenotyping research, with the goal of advancing mental health risk assessment within the general population. This data set aims to support the field's move away from siloed research laboratories collecting proprietary data and toward interdisciplinary collaborations that incorporate clinical, technical, and quantitative expertise at all stages of the research process. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/53857.
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 | 0.030 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.051 | 0.013 |
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".