Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39981696›Full record

ArticleThe journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences2025

Returning Individualized Wearable Sensor Results to Older Adult Research Participants: A Pilot Study.

Shelby L Bachman, Krista S Leonard-Corzo, Jennifer M Blankenship, Michael A Busa, Corinna Serviente, Matthew W Limoges, Robert T Marcotte, Ieuan Clay, Kate Lyden

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A 360 Degree Qualitative Ethical Assessment of Reporting Patient Reported Outcomes.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2026
    Article
  2. Preliminary feasibility and development of a heart rate-based mobility and activity scale for hospitalized older adults.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2025
    Article
  3. Preliminary feasibility and development of a heart rate-based mobility and activity scale for hospitalized older adults.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2025
    Article
  4. 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

9 authors.

Shelby L BachmanVivoSense, Inc., Newport Coast, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4460-4661
Krista S Leonard-CorzoVivoSense, Inc., Newport Coast, California, USA.
Jennifer M BlankenshipVivoSense, Inc., Newport Coast, California, USA.
Michael A BusaInstitute for Applied Life Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
Corinna ServienteInstitute for Applied Life Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
Matthew W LimogesInstitute for Applied Life Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
Robert T MarcotteVivoSense, Inc., Newport Coast, California, USA.
Ieuan ClayVivoSense, Inc., Newport Coast, California, USA.
Kate LydenVivoSense, Inc., Newport Coast, California, USA.

Funding

Validating novel sleep sensors and devices in older adults with Alzheimer's diseaseP30AG073107 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST · PI Benjamin M. Marlin · 2021 to 2026
$32.0M
Alzheimer's Disease 5P30AG073107-02Army Research Laboratory Cooperative Agreement #W911NF2120208DEVCOM Cooperative Agreement # W911QX23D0009Massachusetts Artificial IntelligenceNational Institutes of Aging 5P30AG073107-02 Pilot A3NIA NIH HHS P30 AG073107NIH HHSTechnology Center for Connected Care in Aging
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWearable sensors that monitor physical behaviors are increasingly adopted in clinical research. Older adult research participants have expressed interest in tracking and receiving feedback on their physical behaviors. Simultaneously, researchers and clinical trial sponsors are interested in returning results to participants, but the question of how to return individual study results derived from research-grade wearable sensors remains unanswered. In this study, we (1) assessed the feasibility of returning individual physical behavior results to older adult research participants and (2) obtained participant feedback on the returned results.

methodsOlder adult participants (N = 20; ages 67-96) underwent 14 days of remote monitoring with 2 wearable sensors. We then used a semiautomated process to generate a 1-page report summarizing each participant's physical behaviors across the 14 days. This report was delivered to each participant via email, and they were asked to evaluate the report.

resultsParticipants found the reports easy to understand, health-relevant, interesting, and visually pleasing. They had valuable suggestions to improve data interpretability and raised concerns such as comparisons with measures derived from their consumer-grade sensors.

conclusionsWe have demonstrated the feasibility of returning individual physical behavior results from research-grade devices to older research participants, and our results indicate that this practice is well-received. Further research to develop more efficient and scalable systems to return results to participants, and to understand the preferences of participants in larger, more representative samples, is warranted.

Indexed as

Wearable Electronic DevicesAgedAged, 80 and overExerciseFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMalePilot ProjectsClinical researchParticipant preferencesPhysical behaviorResults dissemination

Identifiers

PMID39981696
PMCPMC12004365

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.