Week-Ahead Prediction of High-Risk Drinking Episodes Among Young Adults Using Wearable Biosignals and Psychological Vulnerabilities: Prospective Observational Machine Learning Study (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although machine learning has increasingly been used to predict mental health symptoms and maladaptive behaviors, real-world prediction of addiction-related risk remains limited. Emotional and temperamental vulnerabilities are established correlates of alcohol-related problems, yet few studies have integrated these factors with wearable-derived biosignals in alcohol-risk prediction models. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated whether machine learning models could predict weekly high-risk drinking episodes among young adults with elevated alcohol-use risk by integrating wearable-derived health data with baseline emotional and personality vulnerability indicators. METHODS: In this prospective observational study, adults in their 20s completed weekly self-report surveys and wore Fitbit devices for 4 weeks. Features from week t were used to predict the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Korean version (AUDIT-K)-based high-risk drinking label at week t+1. Positive labels were defined using AUDIT-K high-risk drinking cutoffs, with scores of ≥20 for men and ≥10 for women. Extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) and random forest models were evaluated across self-report-only, wearable-only, and integrated feature sets using 5-fold participant-level grouped cross-validation. RESULTS: A total of 206 participants contributed 620 week-level observations, of which 85 (13.7%) were labeled as positive high-risk drinking episodes. In participant-level grouped cross-validation, the integrated random forest model showed the most favorable sensitivity-oriented performance, with a mean accuracy of 0.617 (SD 0.078), recall/sensitivity of 0.653 (SD 0.144), area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC AUC) of 0.681 (SD 0.079), and area under the precision-recall curve (PR AUC) of 0.255 (SD 0.090). The integrated XGBoost model achieved an accuracy of 0.670 (SD 0.089), recall/sensitivity of 0.399 (SD 0.174), ROC AUC of 0.651 (SD 0.089), and PR AUC of 0.228 (SD 0.074). Shapley additive explanations analyses indicated that both baseline vulnerability indicators and wearable-derived weekly summaries contributed to model predictions. CONCLUSIONS: Integrating baseline emotional and personality vulnerability indicators with wearable-derived weekly health signals may provide useful information for week-ahead prediction of high-risk drinking episodes. These findings provide preliminary support for wearable-assisted alcohol-risk stratification, although the modest positive predictive performance indicates that external validation and more proximal within-person measures are needed before real-world early-warning or just-in-time adaptive intervention applications.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".