ArticleBehavior research methods2026
Collecting, detecting, and handling non-wear intervals in longitudinal light exposure data.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of human visual experience data.Journal of vision · 2026Article
- Evaluating chest-worn light logger adherence: development and application of a wear/non-wear model.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Auxiliary data, quality assurance and quality control for wearable light loggers and optical radiation dosimeters.Npj biological timing and sleep · 2026Article
- How to Deal With Darkness: Modeling and Visualization of Zero-Inflated Personal Light Exposure Data on a Logarithmic Scale.Journal of biological rhythms · 2025Article
- Identifying chest-worn light logger adherence: a validation study.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In field studies using wearable light loggers, participants often need to remove the devices, resulting in non-wear intervals of varying and unknown duration. Accurate detection of these intervals is an essential step during data pre-processing. Here, we deployed a multi-modal approach to collect non-wear time during a longitudinal light exposure collection campaign and systematically compare non-wear detection strategies. Healthy participants (n = 26; mean age 28 ± 5 years, 14F) wore a near-corneal plane light logger for 1 week and reported non-wear events in three ways: pressing an "event marker" button on the light logger, placing it in a black bag, and using an app-based Wear log. Wear log entries, checked twice daily, served as ground truth for non-wear detection, showing that non-wear time constituted 5.4 ± 3.8% (mean ± SD) of total participation time. Button presses at the start and end of non-wear intervals were identified in >85.4% of cases when considering time windows beyond 1 min for detection. To detect non-wear intervals based on black bag use and lack of motion, we employed an algorithm that detects clusters of low illuminance and clusters of low activity. Performance was higher for illuminance (F1 = 0.78) than for activity (F1 = 0.52). Light exposure metrics derived from the full dataset, a dataset filtered for non-wear based on self-reports, and a dataset filtered for non-wear using the low illuminance clusters detection algorithm showed minimal differences. Our results highlight that while non-wear detection may be less critical in high-compliance cohorts, systematically collecting and detecting non-wear intervals is feasible and important for ensuring robust data pre-processing.
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.