Back

Leveraging long-term smartwatch data to inform Parkinson's disease progression, subtypes, and risk

Schalkamp, A.-K.; Peall, K. J.; Harrison, N. A.; Escott-Price, V.; Sandor, C.

2023-09-13 health informatics
10.1101/2023.09.13.23295404 medRxiv
Show abstract

Use of digital sensors to passively collect long-term, longitudinal data offers a step change in our ability to monitor Parkinsons disease (PD). However, to date the evaluation of long-term digital sensor data has been neglected in favour of evaluating short-term data collected in controlled settings. To address this, we combined longitudinal clinical and biological assessment data from the Parkinsons Progression Marker Initiative (PPMI) cohort with long-term (mean: 485 days) at-home digital monitoring data collected with the Verily Study Watch. We then derived digital timeseries components leveraging the long-term monitoring of the PPMI. We found three key findings: Firstly, that these digital timeseries components correlated with the rate of progression of motor (r = 0.23, p-value = 8.5x10-3, r = 0.26, p-value = 2.2x10-3) and autonomic symptoms (r = -0.23, p-value = 8.2x10-3), impairments in daily living (r = 0.26, p-value = 2.5x10-3), increase in medication requirements and complications (r = -0.25, p-value = 4.2x10-3), and rate of increase in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) tau (ptau: r = 0.28, p-value = 2.6x10-3; ttau: r = 0.34, p-value = 1.2x10-4). Second, we derived digitally informed subtypes of PD and found higher similarity with CSF (0.35) and DaTscan (0.35) subtypes than has been found for previously published subtypes (CSF: 0.31{+/-}0.01, DaTscan: 0.31{+/-}0.02). Finally, we showed that long-term digital monitoring can inform PD risk and sensitively detect individuals with probable prodromal PD. Our findings highlight the wealth of application areas for digital sensors in PD research.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.