ArticleScientific reports2019
Generalizability of A Neural Network Model for Circadian Phase Prediction in Real-World Conditions.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identification of a Preliminary Plasma Metabolome-based Biomarker for Circadian Phase in Humans.Journal of biological rhythms · 2021Trial
- Wearables in Chronomedicine and Interpretation of Circadian Health.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Estimating dim light melatonin onset time in children using delta changes in melatonin.Sleep and biological rhythms · 2024Article
- CARE as a wearable derived feature linking circadian amplitude to human cognitive functions.NPJ digital medicine · 2023Article
- The circadian stimulus-oscillator model: Improvements to Kronauer's model of the human circadian pacemaker.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Article
- A classification approach to estimating human circadian phase under circadian alignment from actigraphy and photometry data.Journal of pineal research · 2021Article
- Sensor-Based Estimation of Dim Light Melatonin Onset (DLMO) Using Features of Two Time Scales.ACM transactions on computing for healthcare · 2021Article
- Article
- Fatigue risk management based on self-reported fatigue: Expanding a biomathematical model of fatigue-related performance deficits to also predict subjective sleepiness.Transportation research. Part F, Traffic psychology and behaviour · 2021Article
- Distinct Circadian Assessments From Wearable Data Reveal Social Distancing Promoted Internal Desynchrony Between Circadian Markers.Frontiers in digital health · 2021Article
- An Optimal Time for Treatment-Predicting Circadian Time by Machine Learning and Mathematical Modelling.Cancers · 2020Review
- Novel Approaches for Assessing Circadian Rhythmicity in Humans: A Review.Journal of biological rhythms · 2020Review
- Integrating wearable data into circadian models.Current opinion in systems biology · 2020Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A neural network model was previously developed to predict melatonin rhythms accurately from blue light and skin temperature recordings in individuals on a fixed sleep schedule. This study aimed to test the generalizability of the model to other sleep schedules, including rotating shift work. Ambulatory wrist blue light irradiance and skin temperature data were collected in 16 healthy individuals on fixed and habitual sleep schedules, and 28 rotating shift workers. Artificial neural network models were trained to predict the circadian rhythm of (i) salivary melatonin on a fixed sleep schedule; (ii) urinary aMT6s on both fixed and habitual sleep schedules, including shift workers on a diurnal schedule; and (iii) urinary aMT6s in rotating shift workers on a night shift schedule. To determine predicted circadian phase, center of gravity of the fitted bimodal skewed baseline cosine curve was used for melatonin, and acrophase of the cosine curve for aMT6s. On a fixed sleep schedule, the model predicted melatonin phase to within ± 1 hour in 67% and ± 1.5 hours in 100% of participants, with mean absolute error of 41 ± 32 minutes. On diurnal schedules, including shift workers, the model predicted aMT6s acrophase to within ± 1 hour in 66% and ± 2 hours in 87% of participants, with mean absolute error of 63 ± 67 minutes. On night shift schedules, the model predicted aMT6s acrophase to within ± 1 hour in 42% and ± 2 hours in 53% of participants, with mean absolute error of 143 ± 155 minutes. Prediction accuracy was similar when using either 1 (wrist) or 11 skin temperature sensor inputs. These findings demonstrate that the model can predict circadian timing to within ± 2 hours for the vast majority of individuals on diurnal schedules, using blue light and a single temperature sensor. However, this approach did not generalize to night shift conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.