Identifying chest-worn light logger adherence: a validation study
Patterson Gentile, C.; Thomas, A.; Shah, R.; Marquez de Prado, B.; Raj, N.; Szperka, C.; Aguirre, G. K.
Show abstract
BackgroundLight exposure plays an important role in overall health because it entrains circadian rhythms. Recent technological advances in wearable light loggers allow measurement daily light exposure habits. Using a chest-worn light logger, our goal was to 1) develop methodology for differentiating adherent versus non-adherent use, and 2) define differences in lighting intensity in indoor and outdoor environments, to improve data reliability in future clinical studies using this technology. MethodsFive testers used a 10-channel chest worn light logging device under different conditions of wear and non-wear, and across a variety of indoor and outdoor lighting environments. Measurements from the light logger (photopic illuminance, device orientation, accelerometer data, time of day) were used to train and validate a logistic regression model to differentiate wear from non-wear and correct nighttime placement. This model was then applied to 20 adolescents and young adults with migraine who wore the light logger device for one week. Furthermore, measurements of photopic illuminance and melanopic equivalent daytime illuminance (mEDI) of indoor versus outdoor lighting environments were compared to identify the optimal distinction point between darker indoor and brighter outdoor environments for the chest-worn light logger. ResultsMovement, device orientation, light, and time-of-day used as predictors in a logistic regression model had excellent differentiation between wear, non-wear and nighttime use (AUC 0.93 - 0.94), and retained good-to-excellent differentiation when applied to the validation dataset (AUC 0.84 - 0.91). When this model was applied to 20 participants with migraine, we found that 92.9% of participant-days and 71.4% of participant-nights demonstrated at least 80% appropriate use. For differentiating indoor and outdoor lighting environments, the optimal cut-point was 442 lux for photopic illuminance, and 412 lux for mEDI. ConclusionsWe demonstrate that internal measurements from a chest-worn light logging device can reliably differentiate wear from non-wear. We also found that the optimal cut-off to differentiate indoor and outdoor lighting environments was similar though slightly lower than then 1,000 lux cut-offs traditionally used to define bright light conditions. These findings can be used to improve data reliability in studies of everyday light exposure in clinical populations using chest-worn light loggers.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Feasibility characteristics of wrist-worn fitness trackers in health status monitoring for post-COVID patients in remote and rural areas 92%
- Use of assistive technology to assess distal motor function in subjects with neuromuscular disease 90%
- The High Price of Equity in Pulse Oximetry: A cost evaluation and need for interim solutions 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- A clinical trial to evaluate the dayzz smartphone app on employee sleep, health, and productivity at a large US employer 93%
- Behaviour-based movement cut-off points in 3-year old children comparing wrist- with hip-worn actigraphs MW8 and GT3X 93%
- Within-subjects ultra-short sleep-wake protocol for characterising circadian variations in retinal function 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Elastomeric Harnesses Decrease Aerosol Particles Leak and Improve the Fit of Surgical Masks 89%
- Estimating the Burden of Influenza on Daily Activity at Population Scale Using Commercial Wearable Sensors 88%
- Adequacy of serial self-performed SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen-detection testing for longitudinal mass screening in the workplace 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- PyPlr: A versatile, integrated system of hardware and software for researching the human pupillary light reflex 89%
- A New Paradigm for Investigating Real-World Social Behavior and its Neural Underpinnings 88%
- A simple method for comparing peripheral and central color vision by means of two smartphones 87%
Similar papers in this journal
- Machine learning approach for ambient-light-corrected parameters and the Neuro-Pupillary Index (NPx) in smartphone-based pupillometry 92%
- Application of Digital Tools and Artificial Intelligence to the Myasthenia Gravis Core Examination 91%
- Forecasting seizure likelihood with wearable technology 89%
"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.