ArticleScientific reports2025
Machine learning-based prediction of restless legs syndrome using digital phenotypes from wearables and smartphone data.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bipolarity as an Independent Correlate of Clinical Profiles in Insomnia: A Factorial Analysis Across Multiple Clinical Domains.Brain and behavior · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Restless legs syndrome (RLS) is a relatively common neurosensory disorder that causes an irresistible urge for leg movement. RLS causes sleep disturbances and reduced quality of life, but accurate diagnosis remains challenging owing to the reliance on subjective reporting. This study aimed to propose a predictive machine learning model based on digital phenotypes for RLS diagnosis. Self-reported lifestyle data were integrated via a smartphone application with objective biometric data from wearable devices to obtain 85 features processed based on circadian rhythms. Prediction models used these features to distinguish between the non-RLS (International Restless Legs Study Group Severity Rating Scale [IRLS] score ≤ 10) and RLS symptom groups (10 < IRLS ≤ 20) and between the non-RLS and severe RLS symptom groups (IRLS > 20). The RF model showed the highest performance in predicting the RLS symptom group and XGB model in the severe RLS symptom group. For the RLS symptom group, when using only wearable device data, the AUC, accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 scores were 0.78, 0.70, 0.66, 0.84, and 0.74, respectively, while these scores combining wearable device and application data were 0.86, 0.76, 0.68, 1.00, and 0.81, respectively. For the severe RLS symptom group, when using only wearable device data, XGB achieved AUC, accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 scores of 0.66, 0.84, 0.89, 0.93, and 0.91, respectively, while these scores combining wearable device and application data were 0.70, 0.80, 0.88, 0.90, and 0.89, respectively. Diverse digital phenotypes clinically associated with RLS were processed based on circadian rhythms to demonstrate the potential of digital phenotyping for RLS prediction. Thus, our study establishes early detection and personalized management of RLS.Trial Registration: Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS) KCT0009175 (Registration data: Feb-15-2024) ( https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/detailSearch.do?search_lang=E&focus=reset_12&search_page=M&pageSize=10&page=undefined&seq=26133&status=5&seq_group=26133 ).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.