Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39079945›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Mitigating data quality challenges in ambulatory wrist-worn wearable monitoring through analytical and practical approaches.

Jonas Van Der Donckt, Nicolas Vandenbussche, Jeroen Van Der Donckt, Stephanie Chen, Marija Stojchevska, Mathias De Brouwer, Bram Steenwinckel, Koen Paemeleire, Femke Ongenae, Sofie Van Hoecke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Jonas Van Der DoncktIDLab, Ghent University - Imec, Technologiepark-Zwijnaarde, 9052, Ghent, Belgium. Jonvdrdo.VanDerDonckt@UGent.be.
Nicolas VandenbusscheDepartment of Neurology, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Jeroen Van Der DoncktIDLab, Ghent University - Imec, Technologiepark-Zwijnaarde, 9052, Ghent, Belgium.
Stephanie ChenIDLab, Ghent University - Imec, Technologiepark-Zwijnaarde, 9052, Ghent, Belgium.
Marija StojchevskaIDLab, Ghent University - Imec, Technologiepark-Zwijnaarde, 9052, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-9692-9874
Mathias De BrouwerIDLab, Ghent University - Imec, Technologiepark-Zwijnaarde, 9052, Ghent, Belgium.
Bram SteenwinckelIDLab, Ghent University - Imec, Technologiepark-Zwijnaarde, 9052, Ghent, Belgium.
Koen PaemeleireDepartment of Neurology, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Femke OngenaeIDLab, Ghent University - Imec, Technologiepark-Zwijnaarde, 9052, Ghent, Belgium.
Sofie Van HoeckeIDLab, Ghent University - Imec, Technologiepark-Zwijnaarde, 9052, Ghent, Belgium.

Funding

Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Research Foundation Flanders) 1S56322N
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chronic disease management and follow-up are vital for realizing sustained patient well-being and optimal health outcomes. Recent advancements in wearable technologies, particularly wrist-worn devices, offer promising solutions for longitudinal patient monitoring, replacing subjective, intermittent self-reporting with objective, continuous monitoring. However, collecting and analyzing data from wearables presents several challenges, such as data entry errors, non-wear periods, missing data, and wearable artifacts. In this work, we explore these data analysis challenges using two real-world datasets (mBrain21 and ETRI lifelog2020). We introduce practical countermeasures, including participant compliance visualizations, interaction-triggered questionnaires to assess personal bias, and an optimized pipeline for detecting non-wear periods. Additionally, we propose a visualization-oriented approach to validate processing pipelines using scalable tools such as tsflex and Plotly-Resampler. Lastly, we present a bootstrapping methodology to evaluate the variability of wearable-derived features in the presence of partially missing data segments. Prioritizing transparency and reproducibility, we provide open access to our detailed code examples, facilitating adaptation in future wearable research. In conclusion, our contributions provide actionable approaches for improving wearable data collection and analysis.

Indexed as

Data AccuracyMonitoring, AmbulatoryWearable Electronic DevicesWristAdultFemaleHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID39079945
PMCPMC11289092

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.