Feasibility characteristics of wrist-worn fitness trackers in health status monitoring for post-COVID patients in remote and rural areas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Common, consumer-grade biosensors mounted on fitness trackers and smartwatches can measure an array of biometrics that have potential utility in post-discharge medical monitoring, especially in remote/rural communities. The feasibility characteristics for wrist-worn biosensors are poorly described for post-COVID conditions and rural populations. METHODS: We prospectively recruited patients in rural communities who were enrolled in an at-home rehabilitation program for post-COVID conditions. They were asked to wear a FitBit Charge 2 device and biosensor parameters were analyzed [e.g. heart rate, sleep, and activity]. Electronic patient reported outcome measures [E-PROMS] for mental [bi-weekly] and physical [daily] symptoms were collected using SMS text or email [per patient preference]. Exit surveys and interviews evaluated the patient experience. RESULTS: Ten patients were observed for an average of 58 days and half [N = 5] were monitored for 8 weeks or more. Five patients [50%] had been hospitalized with COVID [mean stay = 41 days] and 4 [36%] had required mechanical ventilation. As baseline, patients had moderate to severe levels of anxiety, depression, and stress; fatigue and shortness of breath were the most prevalent physical symptoms. Four patients [40%] already owned a smartwatch. In total, 575 patient days of patient monitoring occurred across 10 patients. Biosensor data was usable for 91.3% of study hours and surveys were completed 82.1% and 78.7% of the time for physical and mental symptoms, respectively. Positive correlations were observed between stress and resting heart rate [r = 0.360, p<0.01], stress and daily steps [r = 0.335, p<0.01], and anxiety and daily steps [r = 0.289, p<0.01]. There was a trend toward negative correlation between sleep time and physical symptom burden [r = -0.211, p = 0.05]. Patients reported an overall positive experience and identified the potential for wearable devices to improve medical safety and access to care. Concerns around data privacy/security were infrequent. CONCLUSIONS: We report excellent feasibility characteristics for wrist-worn biosensors and e-PROMS as a possible substrate for multi-modal disease tracking in post-COVID conditions. Adapting consumer-grade wearables for medical use and scalable remote patient monitoring holds great potential.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".