ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025
Predictive performance of wearable sensors for mortality risk in older adults: a model development and validation study.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Many adults in high-income countries carry a device capable of measuring physical-activity behaviour. Thus, there is public health need to understand whether such data can enhance prediction of future health outcomes. We aimed to investigate whether device-measured daily-step count and walking cadence improve the prediction of mortality beyond traditional risk-factors. Methods: Risk models were developed to predict five-year all-cause mortality using data from the UK Biobank accelerometer sub-study, with external validation in the US 2011-2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Median daily-step count and peak one-minute walking cadence were derived using self-supervised machine learning models from seven-day wrist-worn accelerometer data. Cox models were used to develop a baseline model incorporating traditional risk-factors, and a baseline model plus accelerometer data (i.e. daily-steps and walking cadence). Changes in model performance were assessed using Harrell's C-index, net reclassification index (NRI; 10% threshold), and the Nam-D'Agostino calibration test. Findings: Among 79,717 UK Biobank participants, 1,640 died within 5-years. Adding accelerometer data to the baseline model modestly improved risk discrimination and classification with a change in c-index of 0.008 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.005-0.011) and 3.3% NRI (95%CI 2.1%-4.5%). Greatest improvements in prediction were observed in participants with prior disease at baseline, showing a change in c-index of 0.028 (95%CI 0.019-0.039) and 5.9% NRI (95%CI 3.1%-8.6%). In the NHANES external validation cohort (n=4,713; deaths=378), similar improvements in prediction were observed (change in c-index: 0.015, 95%CI 0.007-0.025; NRI: 4.0%, 95%CI 0.7%-7.4%). All models were well calibrated (Nam-D'Agostino χ Interpretation: Device-measured daily-step count and walking cadence consistently demonstrated modest improvements in predicting mortality risk beyond traditional risk-factors, with the most significant enhancements seen in individuals with prior disease. These findings suggest that incorporating information from wearables does provide important new ways to improve risk stratification for targeted intervention in high-risk individuals.
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.