Evidence mapPaperPMID 38935947Full record

ArticleJMIR bioinformatics and biotechnology2022

Digital Phenotyping in Health Using Machine Learning Approaches: Scoping Review.

Schenelle Dayna Dlima, Santosh Shevade, Sonia Rebecca Menezes, Aakash Ganju

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR bioinformatics and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Understanding Barriers to the Collection of Mobile and Wearable Device Data to Monitor Health and Cognition in Older Adults: A Scoping Review.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Schenelle Dayna DlimaSaathealth, Mumbai, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2782-6972
Santosh ShevadeSaathealth, Mumbai, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5939-5428
Sonia Rebecca MenezesSaathealth, Mumbai, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4469-3553
Aakash GanjuSaathealth, Mumbai, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9547-4046

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital phenotyping is the real-time collection of individual-level active and passive data from users in naturalistic and free-living settings via personal digital devices, such as mobile phones and wearable devices. Given the novelty of research in this field, there is heterogeneity in the clinical use cases, types of data collected, modes of data collection, data analysis methods, and outcomes measured.

objectiveThe primary aim of this scoping review was to map the published research on digital phenotyping and to outline study characteristics, data collection and analysis methods, machine learning approaches, and future implications.

methodsWe utilized an a priori approach for the literature search and data extraction and charting process, guided by the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews). We identified relevant studies published in 2020, 2021, and 2022 on PubMed and Google Scholar using search terms related to digital phenotyping. The titles, abstracts, and keywords were screened during the first stage of the screening process, and the second stage involved screening the full texts of the shortlisted articles. We extracted and charted the descriptive characteristics of the final studies, which were countries of origin, study design, clinical areas, active and/or passive data collected, modes of data collection, data analysis approaches, and limitations.

resultsA total of 454 articles on PubMed and Google Scholar were identified through search terms associated with digital phenotyping, and 46 articles were deemed eligible for inclusion in this scoping review. Most studies evaluated wearable data and originated from North America. The most dominant study design was observational, followed by randomized trials, and most studies focused on psychiatric disorders, mental health disorders, and neurological diseases. A total of 7 studies used machine learning approaches for data analysis, with random forest, logistic regression, and support vector machines being the most common.

conclusionsOur review provides foundational as well as application-oriented approaches toward digital phenotyping in health. Future work should focus on more prospective, longitudinal studies that include larger data sets from diverse populations, address privacy and ethical concerns around data collection from consumer technologies, and build "digital phenotypes" to personalize digital health interventions and treatment plans.

Indexed as

active datadigital healthdigital phenotypingmachine learningmobile applicationpassive datapersonal device datawearable devicewearable sensor

Identifiers

PMID38935947
PMCPMC11135220

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.