Dear Watch, Should I Get a COVID-19 Test? Designing deployable machine learning for wearables
Nestor, B.; Hunter, J.; Kainkaryam, R.; Drysdale, E.; Inglis, J. B.; Shapiro, A.; Nagaraj, S.; Ghassemi, M.; Foschini, L.; Goldenberg, A.
Show abstract
Commercial wearable devices are surfacing as an appealing mechanism to detect COVID-19 and potentially other public health threats, due to their widespread use. To assess the validity of wearable devices as population health screening tools, it is essential to evaluate predictive methodologies based on wearable devices by mimicking their real-world deployment. Several points must be addressed to transition from statistically significant differences between infected and uninfected cohorts to COVID-19 inferences on individuals. We demonstrate the strengths and shortcomings of existing approaches on a cohort of 32, 198 individuals who experience influenza like illness (ILI), 204 of which report testing positive for COVID-19. We show that, despite commonly made design mistakes resulting in overestimation of performance, when properly designed wearables can be effectively used as a part of the detection pipeline. For example, knowing the week of year, combined with naive randomised test set generation leads to substantial overestimation of COVID-19 classification performance at 0.73 AUROC. However, an average AUROC of only 0.55 {+/-} 0.02 would be attainable in a simulation of real-world deployment, due to the shifting prevalence of COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ILI to trigger further testing. In this work we show how to train a machine learning model to differentiate ILI days from healthy days, followed by a survey to differentiate COVID-19 from influenza and unspecified ILI based on symptoms. In a forthcoming week, models can expect a sensitivity of 0.50 (0-0.74, 95% CI), while utilising the wearable device to reduce the burden of surveys by 35%. The corresponding false positive rate is 0.22 (0.02-0.47, 95% CI). In the future, serious consideration must be given to the design, evaluation, and reporting of wearable device interventions if they are to be relied upon as part of frequent COVID-19 or other public health threat testing infrastructures.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Population Analysis Of Mortality Risk: Predictive Models Using Motion Sensors For 100,000 Participants In The UK Biobank National Cohort 94%
- Emulation of epidemics via Bluetooth-based virtual safe virus spread: experimental setup, software, and data 93%
- Modular Clinical Decision Support Networks (MoDN)—Updatable, Interpretable, and Portable Predictions for Evolving Clinical Environments 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- High-Resolution Digital Phenotypes from Consumer Wearables Enhance Prediction of Cardiometabolic Risk Markers 95%
- Quantified Flu: an individual-centered approach to gaining sickness-related insights from wearable data 93%
- Predicting public take-up of digital contact tracing during the COVID-19 crisis: Results of a national survey 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- An infection prediction model developed from inpatient data can predict out-of-hospital COVID-19 infections from wearable data when controlled for dataset shift 96%
- Listening to Bluetooth Beacons for Epidemic Risk Mitigation 94%
- How detection ranges and usage stops impact digital contact tracing effectiveness for COVID-19 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Rett syndrome severity estimation with the BioStamp nPoint using interactions between heart rate variability and body movement 92%
- Early Detection of COVID-19 Outbreaks Using Human Mobility Data 92%
- A causal inference approach for estimating effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions during Covid-19 pandemic 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.