The Trifecta of Industry, Academic, and Health System Partnership to Improve Mental Health Care Through Smartphone-Based Remote Patient Monitoring: Development and Usability Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mental health treatment is hindered by the limited number of mental health care providers and the infrequency of care. Digital mental health technology can help supplement treatment by remotely monitoring patient symptoms and predicting mental health crises in between clinical visits. However, the feasibility of digital mental health technologies has not yet been sufficiently explored. Rhythms, from the company Health Rhythms, is a smartphone platform that uses passively acquired smartphone data with artificial intelligence and predictive analytics to alert patients and providers to an emerging mental health crisis. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to test the feasibility and acceptability of Rhythms among patients attending an academic psychiatric outpatient clinic. METHODS: Our group embedded Rhythms into the electronic health record of a large health system. Patients with a diagnosis of major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, or other mood disorder were contacted online and enrolled for a 6-week trial of Rhythms. Participants provided data by completing electronic surveys as well as by active and passive use of Rhythms. Emergent and urgent alerts were monitored and managed according to passively collected data and patient self-ratings. A purposively sampled group of participants also participated in qualitative interviews about their experience with Rhythms at the end of the study. RESULTS: Of the 104 participants, 89 (85.6%) completed 6 weeks of monitoring. The majority of the participants were women (72/104, 69.2%), White (84/104, 80.8%), and non-Hispanic (100/104, 96.2%) and had a diagnosis of major depressive disorder (71/104, 68.3%). Two emergent alerts and 19 urgent alerts were received and managed according to protocol over 16 weeks. More than two-thirds (63/87, 72%) of those participating continued to use Rhythms after study completion. Comments from participants indicated appreciation for greater self-awareness and provider connection, while providers reported that Rhythms provided a more nuanced understanding of patient experience between clinical visits. CONCLUSIONS: Rhythms is a user-friendly, electronic health record-adaptable, smartphone-based tool that provides patients and providers with a greater understanding of patient mental health status. Integration of Rhythms into health systems has the potential to facilitate mental health care and improve the experience of both patients and providers.
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 | 0.017 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".