MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414934322 · doi:10.2196/72338

Using Wearable Sensors to Measure and Predict Personal Circadian Lighting Exposure in Nursing Home Residents: Model Development and Validation

2025· article· en· W4414934322 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shevvaa Beiglary, Yanxiao Feng, Neda Ghaeili Ardabili, Ying‐Ling Jao, Yo-Jen Liao, Julian Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Aging · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCircadian rhythm and melatonin
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWearable computerWearable technologyMeasure (data warehouse)Nursing homesCircadian rhythmPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Lighting, especially circadian lighting, significantly affects people with dementia, influencing sleep patterns, daytime alertness, and behavioral symptoms such as agitation. Since individuals experience and respond to light differently, measuring personal lighting exposure is essential for understanding its impact on health. Without individual data, the connection between lighting and health outcomes remains unclear. Wearable sensors provide a practical way to track personal light exposure, helping researchers better assess its effects on circadian rhythms and overall well-being. Objective: This study aims to develop and validate both calibration and predictive models using wearable lighting sensors to assess individual circadian lighting exposure accurately. By leveraging machine learning techniques and empirical data, we seek to establish a reliable method for health care researchers and practitioners to investigate and optimize lighting conditions for improved circadian health in nursing homes, especially for residents with dementia. Methods: A combination of controlled laboratory experiments and on-site data collection was conducted using professional spectrophotometer measurements as ground truth. Calibration models were developed for photopic lux and correlated color temperature, while predictive models estimated circadian metrics such as circadian stimulus. The sensors and the developed models were implemented in a real-world health care research project about bright light therapy intervention at 2 assisted-living facilities. Results: The calibration models for photopic lux and correlated color temperature demonstrated strong accuracy, with an adjusted R² of 0.858 and 0.982, respectively, ensuring reliable sensor measurements. Predictive models for circadian stimulus were developed using both simple regression and machine learning techniques. The random forest model outperformed linear regression, achieving an adjusted R² of 0.915 and a cross-validation R² of 0.857, demonstrating high generalization capability. Upon the implementation of these models, significant individual variations in circadian light exposure were found in the study, highlighting the significance of customized lighting evaluations. These results confirm the effectiveness of wearable sensors, combined with the developed calibration and predictive modeling, in accurately assessing personal circadian light exposure and supporting lighting-related health care research. Conclusions: This study introduces an effective and scalable approach to circadian light assessment using wearable sensors and predictive modeling. By replacing labor-intensive and costly spectrometer measurements, the proposed methodology enables continuous, cost-effective monitoring in health care environments. However, challenges related to sensor wearability, durability, and user compliance were identified, underscoring the need for further sensor design refinements. Future research should focus on refining sensor integration, expanding case studies, and developing adaptive lighting interventions to enhance circadian health in vulnerable populations.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR AgingSame topicCircadian rhythm and melatoninFrench-language works237,207