MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408818453 · doi:10.2196/56678

Behavioral Markers in Older Adults During COVID-19 Confinement: Secondary Analysis of In-Home Sensor Data

2025· article· en· W4408818453 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Knoo Lee, Noah Marchal, Eliezer Robinson, Kimberly Powell

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. National Library of MedicineNational Institute of Nursing Research
KeywordsPreprintComputer sciencemHealthPsychologyGerontologyData scienceMedicineWorld Wide WebPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Older adults were disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, with a high number of deaths occurring in this age group. The impact of social isolation and home confinement continues to impact the mental and emotional health of older adults, despite the end of the COVID-19 pandemic. Unhealthy lifestyle behaviors, including physical and social inactivity, and poor sleep quality, have been reported. Recommendations for healthy lifestyle changes have primarily targeted the general population, highlighting the need for personalized recommendations for vulnerable older adults. Remote sensing technologies may offer an opportunity to understand behavior changes among older adults and provide personalized recommendations. Objective: This study aims to describe the effects of home confinement and social isolation on community-dwelling older adults during the COVID-19 outbreak and investigate how integrated computing technologies, such as remote sensors installed in homes, can help inform recommendations for safe and healthy lifestyles. Methods: As part of a larger study and ongoing research with community-dwelling older adults, remote sensors including bed transducers, 3D depth cameras, and passive infrared (PIR) motion sensors were installed in the homes of the study sample. We compared features derived from sensors for approximately one month before the COVID-19 outbreak (January 14, 2020-February 13, 2020) and one month after the onset of the pandemic (March 14, 2020-April 13, 2020). We used descriptive statistics and paired-sample t tests to compare the 2 time periods, pre-COVID-19 and early-COVID-19. Results: Sensor data from 64 older adults were analyzed, the majority identifying as female (n=51, 80%), aged >76 years (n=58, 92%), and living alone (n=50, 78%). Results from paired-sample t tests demonstrated significant differences in sensor features between the pre-COVID-19 and early-COVID-19 time periods. We found statistically significant differences in bed restlessness (pre-COVID: mean 14.98, SD 5.10; early-COVID: mean 15.56, SD 5.25; t554=-4.10; P<.001), time spent in bed (pre-COVID: mean 32,547.41, SD 9269.96; early-COVID: mean 33,494.73, SD 10,887.33; t554=-2.81; P=.005), pulse (pre-COVID: mean 68.45, SD 3.30; early-COVID: mean 68.10, SD 3.36; t554=3.66; P<.001), respiration (pre-COVID: mean 14.54, SD 1.32; early-COVID: mean 14.41, SD 1.31; t553=3.72; P<.001), and stride length (pre-COVID: mean 29.10, SD 4.813; early-COVID: mean 28.76, SD 5.016; t595=2.17; P=.03). Among the study sample, bed restlessness and time spent in bed increased between the 2 time periods, while pulse, respiration, and stride length decreased. Conclusions: This study highlights that home confinement during the pandemic significantly impacted the behavior and health of older adults, leading to more sedentary lifestyles and poorer sleep quality. These changes may contribute to a decline in physical and mental health, increasing the risk of depression, lack of social contact, and diminished functional capacity. The findings underscore the need for older adults in future infectious disease outbreaks and suggest in-home sensor technology as a potential tool for monitoring their health and guiding decisions during periods of confinement.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.391 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealth→Same topicCOVID-19 and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→