Unlocking Tomorrow’s Health Care: Expanding the Clinical Scope of Wearables by Applying Artificial Intelligence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As an integral aspect of health care, digital technology has enabled modelling of complex relationships to detect, screen, diagnose, and predict patient outcomes. With massive data sets, artificial intelligence (AI) can have marked effects on 3 levels: for patients, clinicians, and health systems. In this review, we discuss contemporary AI-enabled wearable devices undergoing research in the field of cardiovascular medicine. These include devices such as smart watches, electrocardiogram patches, and smart textiles such as smart socks and chest sensors for diagnosis, management, and prognostication of conditions such as atrial fibrillation, heart failure, and hypertension as well as monitoring for cardiac rehabilitation. We review the evolution of machine learning algorithms used in wearable devices from random forest models to the use of convolutional neural networks and transformers. We further discuss frameworks for wearable technologies such as the V3-stage process of verification, analytical validation, and clinical validation as well as challenges of AI integration in medicine such as data veracity, validity, and security and provide a reference framework to maintain fairness and equity. Last, clinician and patient perspectives are discussed to highlight the importance of considering end-user feedback in development and regulatory processes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".