Day-to-day variability in activity levels detects transitions to depressive symptoms in bipolar disorder earlier than changes in sleep and mood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Anticipating clinical transitions in bipolar disorder (BD) is essential for the development of clinically actionable predictions. Our aim was to determine what is the earliest indicator of the onset of depressive symptoms in BD. We hypothesized that changes in activity would be the earliest indicator of future depressive symptoms. The study was a prospective, observational, contactless study. Participants were 127 outpatients with a primary diagnosis of BD, followed up for 12.6 (5.7) [(mean (SD)] months. They wore a smart ring continuously, which monitored their daily activity and sleep parameters. Participants were also asked to complete weekly self-ratings using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Altman Self-Rating Mania Scale (ASRS) scales. Primary outcome measures were depressive symptom onset detection metrics (i.e., accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity); and detection delay (in days), compared between self-rating scales and wearable data. Depressive symptoms were labeled as two or more consecutive weeks of total PHQ-9 > 10, and data-driven symptom onsets were detected using time-frequency spectral derivative spike detection (TF-SD2). Our results showed that day-to-day variability in the number of steps anticipated the onset of depressive symptoms 7.0 (9.0) (median (IQR)) days before they occurred, significantly earlier than the early prediction window provided by deep sleep duration (median (IQR), 4.0 (5.0) days; p <.05). Taken together, our results demonstrate that changes in activity were the earliest indicator of depressive symptoms in participants with BD. Transition to dynamic representations of behavioral phenomena in psychiatry may facilitate episode forecasting and individualized preventive interventions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".