ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2025
Internet of health things and machine learning for continuous quality of life monitoring.
Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundContinuous Quality of Life (QoL) monitoring enables many benefits, such as early healthcare interventions. This work uses Internet of Health Things (IoHT) data and Machine Learning to infer physical and psychological Quality of Life measures.
methodsWe conducted a longitudinal study with 44 participants for six months. Health data were collected daily through smartphones and wearables, and the participants answered the WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire weekly. Then, five Machine Learning models were trained to evaluate their ability to estimate users’ QoL.
resultsRandom Forest (RF) had the best results considering the Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE). RF got an RMSE of 7.8618 for the physical domain and 7.4591 for the psychological domain.
conclusionsOverall, it is possible to use IoHT data to infer users’ QoL, considering a certain margin of error; RF had a reasonable performance for this problem and it was not found any decisive feature for the inference process. This last point reinforces that QoL inference using IoHT data is not trivial, and only combining a large number of features can give relevant insights into users’ QoL. Project approved by UFC ethics committee (ID 56153322.0.0000.5054) on March 9, 2022.
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.