MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412531565 · doi:10.2196/64889

Associations Between Daily Symptoms and Pain Flares in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Case-Crossover mHealth Study

2025· article· en· W4412531565 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ting‐Chen Chloe Hsu, Belay Birlie Yimer, Pauline Whelan, Christopher J. Armitage, Katie L. Druce, John McBeth

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersVersus Arthritis
KeywordsmHealthRheumatoid arthritisMedicineCrossover studyPhysical therapyPsychologyAlternative medicineInternal medicinePsychiatryPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Mobile health (mHealth) technologies, such as smartphones and wearables, enable continuous assessments of individual health information. In chronic musculoskeletal conditions, pain flares, defined as periods of increased pain severity, often coincide with worsening disease activity and cause significant impacts on physical and emotional well-being. Using mHealth technologies can provide insights into individual pain patterns and associated factors. Objective: This study aims to characterize pain flares and identify associated factors in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) by (1) describing the frequency and duration of pain flares using progressively stringent definitions based on pain severity, and (2) exploring associations between pain flares and temporal changes in symptoms across emotional, cognitive, and behavioral domains. Methods: Our 30-day mHealth study collected daily pain severity and related symptoms (scores 1-5, higher are worse) via a smartphone app and passively recorded sleep and physical activity via a wrist-worn accelerometer. Pain flares were defined using a 5-point scale: (1) above average (AA): pain severity > personal median, (2) above threshold (AT): pain severity > 3, and (3) move above threshold (MAT): pain severity moves from 1, 2, 3 to 4 or 5. A case-crossover analysis compared within-person variations of daily symptoms across hazard (3 days before a pain flare) and control (3 days not preceding a pain flare) periods using mean and intraindividual standard deviation. Conditional logistic regression estimated the odds ratio (OR) for pain flare occurrence. Results: A total of 195 participants (160/195, 82.1% females; mean age 57.2 years; average years with RA: 11.3) contributed 5290 days of data. Of these, 88.7% (173/195) experienced at least 1 AA flare (median monthly rate 4, IQR 2.1-5). Nearly half experienced at least 1 AT or MAT flare (median monthly rate 2, IQR 1-4). These pain flares lasted 2 days (IQR 2-3) on average across definitions, with some extending up to 12 days. Worsening mood over 3 days was associated with a 2-fold increase in the likelihood of AT flares the following day (OR 2.04, IQR 1.06-3.94; P<.05). Greater variability in anxiety over 3 days increased the likelihood of both AT (OR 1.67, IQR 1.01-2.78; P<.05) and MAT flares (OR 1.82, IQR 1.08-3.07; P<.05). Similarly, greater variability in sleepiness (OR 1.89, IQR 1.03-3.47; P<.05) also increased the likelihood of AT flares. Sedentary time (%) consistently showed almost no influence across all definitions. Similarly, the simplest definition of AA demonstrated no significant associations across all symptoms. Conclusions: Pain flares were commonly observed in RA. Changes in sleep patterns and emotional distress were associated with pain flare occurrences. This analysis demonstrates the potential of daily mHealth data to identify pain flares, opening opportunities for timely monitoring and personalized management.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.344 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealth→Same topicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies→French-language works237,207→