MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sleep, Sensors, and the Smartwatch: Co-Design Interaction Modalities for On-Wrist Health Apps

2025· article· W7110187876 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicInnovative Human-Technology Interaction
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersKyoto University
KeywordsSmartwatchModalitiesWearable computerDigital healthLeverage (statistics)Wearable technologyKey (lock)mHealtheHealth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Smartwatches have emerged as a key platform for health monitoring and digital interventions, yet their small screen size poses a unique challenge for user interaction, and designing intuitive, engaging, and context-aware interactions for health apps remains a challenge. This paper presents findings from a co-design workshop with 45 participants exploring possible input and output modalities for smartwatch-based serious sleep game apps. Participants mapped interaction modalities (e.g., movement, voice, ambient light) to app features and daily time periods, proposing sensor-driven designs that span active, reflective, and passive use cases. Features like "Fighting Monsters" were linked to daytime movement-based inputs, while heart rate, light, and microphone sensors were proposed for passive interactions during sleep. A heatmap analysis revealed distinct temporal patterns in interaction preferences, offering insights for timing-aware, multimodal design. Our findings inform the development of on-wrist health apps that leverage smartwatch capabilities to support health behavior change through context-sensitive engagement, contributing design strategies that balance usability, engagement, and the clinical potential of wearable health technologies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 topicInnovative Human-Technology InteractionFrench-language works237,207