MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7118085819 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igaf122.1887

Wearable Tech for Health Monitoring of Environmental Events: Case Studies in Experimental Medicine

2025· article· en· W7118085819 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nelson Roque, Mindy Katz, Carol A. Derby

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHealth, Environment, Cognitive Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWearable computerWearable technologyContext (archaeology)AdaptabilityCognitionPsychosocialData collectionEnvironmental dataData quality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the need for adaptability in both daily life and scientific research. Using data from the Einstein Aging Study, we present case studies demonstrating the value of mobile and wearable technologies for behavioral monitoring in rapidly changing environmental conditions. First, we examine data availability during the COVID-19 pandemic, highlighting how smartphone-based assessments enabled real-time tracking of cognitive and psychosocial health measures—such as stress, affect, and social relationships—alongside the impact of different viral strains on cognition and behavior. Second, we explore the feasibility of low-cost wearable air quality monitors in capturing environmental exposures during two distinct events—Canada wildfires of March 2023 and holiday fireworks. Third, we examine how seasonal variations impact cognitive function measurement, highlighting the importance of considering temporal context in behavioral assessments. Our findings suggest that mobile monitoring methods offer a reliable approach to data collection in unpredictable and rapidly changing environmental conditions. Future research should identify the minimum data required for accurate outcome prediction, determining the threshold at which data remains meaningful.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 designCase report
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 venueInnovation in AgingSame topicHealth, Environment, Cognitive AgingFrench-language works237,207