1932

Abstract

Mounting clinical evidence suggests that viral infections can lead to detectable changes in an individual's normal physiologic and behavioral metrics, including heart and respiration rates, heart rate variability, temperature, activity, and sleep prior to symptom onset, potentially even in asymptomatic individuals. While the ability of wearable devices to detect viral infections in a real-world setting has yet to be proven, multiple recent studies have established that individual, continuous data from a range of biometric monitoring technologies can be easily acquired and that through the use of machine learning techniques, physiological signals and warning signs can be identified. In this review, we highlight the existing knowledge base supporting the potential for widespread implementation of biometric data to address existing gaps in the diagnosis and treatment of viral illnesses, with a particular focus on the many important lessons learned from the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-103020-040136
2022-06-06
2024-06-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/bioeng/24/1/annurev-bioeng-103020-040136.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-103020-040136&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. 1.
    Goldsack J, Coravos A, Bakker JP, Bent B, Dowling AV et al. 2020. Verification, analytical validation, and clinical validation (V3): the foundation of determining fit-for-purpose for biometric monitoring technologies (BioMeTs). NPJ Digit. Med. 3:55
    [Google Scholar]
  2. 2.
    Chandrasekaran R, Katthula V, Moustakas E. 2020. Patterns of use and key predictors for the use of wearable health care devices by US adults: insights from a national survey. J. Med. Internet Res. 22:10e22443
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 3.
    Digit. Med. Soc 2021. Defining digital medicine. Digital Medicine Society https://www.dimesociety.org/about-us/defining-digital-medicine/
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 4.
    Elenko E, Underwood L, Zohar D. 2015. Defining digital medicine. Nat. Biotechnol. 33:5456–61
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 5.
    Dias D, Paulo Silva Cunha J 2018. Wearable health devices—vital sign monitoring, systems and technologies. Sensors 18:82414
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 6.
    Cent. Devices Radiol. Health 2019. General wellness: policy for low risk devices Guidance Doc., US Food Drug Admin., Silver Spring, MD
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 7.
    Cent. Devices Radiol. Health 2020. Network of digital health experts Memo, US Food Drug Admin. Silver Spring, MD: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/digital-health-center-excellence/network-digital-health-experts
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 8.
    US Food Drug Admin 2020. CFR—Code of Federal Regulations Title 21 Database, US Food Drug Admin. Silver Spring, MD:
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 9.
    Bent B, Dunn J. 2020. Wearables in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: What are they good for?. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 8:12e25137
    [Google Scholar]
  10. 10.
    US Food Drug Admin 2020. Overview of device regulation. U.S. Food & Drug Administration. https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/device-advice-comprehensive-regulatory-assistance/overview-device-regulation
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 11.
    Manta C, Jain SS, Coravos A, Mendelsohn D, Izmailova ES. 2020. An evaluation of biometric monitoring technologies for vital signs in the era of COVID-19. Clin. Transl. Sci. 13:61034–44
    [Google Scholar]
  12. 12.
    Bent B, Goldstein BA, Kibbe WA, Dunn JP 2020. Investigating sources of inaccuracy in wearable optical heart rate sensors. NPJ Digit. Med. 3:18
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 13.
    Fuller D, Colwell E, Low J, Orychock K, Tobin M et al. 2020. Reliability and validity of commercially available wearable devices for measuring steps, energy expenditure, and heart rate: systematic review. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 8:9e18694
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 14.
    Gillinov S, Etiwy M, Wang R, Blackburn G, Phelan D et al. 2017. Variable accuracy of wearable heart rate monitors during aerobic exercise. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 49:81697–703
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 15.
    Cohen A, Mathews S, Dorsey E, Bates D, Safavi K. 2020. Direct-to-consumer digital health. Lancet Digit. Health 2:4e163–65
    [Google Scholar]
  16. 16.
    Nelson BW, Low CA, Jacobson N, Arean P, Torous J, Allen NB 2020. Guidelines for wrist-worn consumer wearable assessment of heart rate in biobehavioral research. NPJ Digit. Med. 3:90
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 17.
    Cho PJ, Yi J, Ho E, Shandhi MMH, Dinh Yet al 2022. Demographic imbalances resulting from the bring-your-own-device study design. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 104e29510
    [Google Scholar]
  18. 18.
    Hendriks M, van Lotringen JH, Vos-van der Hulst M, Keijsers N. 2021. Bed sensor technology for objective sleep monitoring within the clinical rehabilitation setting: observational feasibility study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 9:2e24339
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 19.
    Miller E, Banerjee N, Zhu T. 2021. Smart homes that detect sneeze, cough, and face touching. Smart Health 19:100170
    [Google Scholar]
  20. 20.
    Jagannath B, Lin K, Pali M, Sankhala D, Muthukumar S, Prasad S 2021. Temporal profiling of cytokines in passively expressed sweat for detection of infection using wearable device. Bioeng. Transl. Med. 6:e10220
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 21.
    Snyder M, Zhou W. 2019. Big data and health. Lancet Digit. Health 1:6e252–54
    [Google Scholar]
  22. 22.
    Wood F, Guinter T 2008. Evolution and implementation of the CDISC Study Data Tabulation Model (SDTM). Pharm. Program. 1:120–27
    [Google Scholar]
  23. 23.
    Bent B, Dunn J. 2021. Optimizing sampling rate of wrist-worn optical sensors for physiologic monitoring. J. Clin. Transl. Sci. 5:1e34
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 24.
    Wang C, Lu W, Narayanan M, Redmond S, Lovell N 2015. Low-power technologies for wearable telecare and telehealth systems: a review. Biomed. Eng. Lett. 5:11–9
    [Google Scholar]
  25. 25.
    Bent B, Lu B, Kim J, Dunn J 2021. Biosignal compression toolbox for digital biomarker discovery. Sensors 21:2516
    [Google Scholar]
  26. 26.
    Deepu CJ, Lian Y. 2014. A joint QRS detection and data compression scheme for wearable sensors. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 62:1165–75
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 27.
    Deepu C, Heng C, Lian Y. 2016. A hybrid data compression scheme for power reduction in wireless sensors for IoT. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Circuits Syst. 11:2245–54
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 28.
    Diamant N, Reinertsen E, Song S, Aguirre A, Stultz C, Batra P. 2021. Patient contrastive learning: a performant, expressive, and practical approach to ECG modeling. arXiv:2104.04569 [cs.LG]
  29. 29.
    Ibaida A, Abuadbba A, Chilamkurti N 2021. Privacy-preserving compression model for efficient IoMT ECG sharing. Comput. Commun. 166:1–8
    [Google Scholar]
  30. 30.
    Imtiaz S, Casson AJ, Rodriguez-Villegas E. 2013. Compression in wearable sensor nodes: impacts of node topology. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 61:41080–90
    [Google Scholar]
  31. 31.
    Bent B, Sim I, Dunn J. 2021. Digital medicine community perspectives and challenges: survey study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 9:2e24570
    [Google Scholar]
  32. 32.
    Mezghani E, Exposito E, Drira K, Da Silveira M, Pruski C 2015. A semantic big data platform for integrating heterogeneous wearable data in healthcare. J. Med. Syst. 39:12185
    [Google Scholar]
  33. 33.
    Chang W, Grady N. 2019. NIST big data interoperability framework NIST Special Pub. 1500-1r2 Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Gaithersburg, MD:
    [Google Scholar]
  34. 34.
    Jayaratne M, Nallaperuma D, De Silva D, Alahakoon D, Devitt B et al. 2019. A data integration platform for patient-centered e-healthcare and clinical decision support. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 92:996–1008
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 35.
    Budd J, Miller BS, Manning E, Lampos V, Zhuang M et al. 2020. Digital technologies in the public-health response to COVID-19. Nat. Med. 26:81183–92
    [Google Scholar]
  36. 36.
    Santos D, Perkusich A, Almeida H 2014. Standard-based and distributed health information sharing for mHealth IoT systems. 2014 IEEE 16th International Conference on e-Health Networking, Applications and Services (Healthcom)94–98 New York: IEEE
    [Google Scholar]
  37. 37.
    Possamai C, Ravaud P, Ghosn L, Tran V 2020. Use of wearable biometric monitoring devices to measure outcomes in randomized clinical trials: a methodological systematic review. BMC Med. 18:1310
    [Google Scholar]
  38. 38.
    Harrison D, Marshall P, Berthouze N, Bird J 2014. Tracking physical activity: problems related to running longitudinal studies with commercial devices. Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct Publication699–702 New York: ACM
    [Google Scholar]
  39. 39.
    Dunn J, Kidzinski L, Runge R, Witt D, Hicks J et al. 2021. Wearable sensors enable personalized predictions of clinical laboratory measurements. Nat. Med. 27:61105–12
    [Google Scholar]
  40. 40.
    Izmailova E, Wagner J, Perakslis E. 2018. Wearable devices in clinical trials: hype and hypothesis. Clin. Pharmacol. Therapeut. 104:142–52
    [Google Scholar]
  41. 41.
    Cox S, Lane A, Volchenboum S 2018. Use of wearable, mobile, and sensor technology in cancer clinical trials. JCO Clin. Cancer Informat. 2:1–11
    [Google Scholar]
  42. 42.
    Geller S, Koch A, Pellettieri B, Carnes M. 2011. Inclusion, analysis, and reporting of sex and race/ethnicity in clinical trials: have we made progress?. J. Women's Health 20:3315–20
    [Google Scholar]
  43. 43.
    Murthy V, Krumholz H, Gross C. 2004. Participation in cancer clinical trials: race-, sex-, and age-based disparities. JAMA 291:222720–26
    [Google Scholar]
  44. 44.
    Panch T, Mattie H, Atun R 2019. Artificial intelligence and algorithmic bias: implications for health systems. J. Glob. Health 9:2010318
    [Google Scholar]
  45. 45.
    Natl. Inst. Health 2019. All of Us research program expands data collection efforts with Fitbit News Release, January 16. https://allofus.nih.gov/news-events-and-media/announcements/all-us-research-program-expands-data-collection-efforts-fitbit
    [Google Scholar]
  46. 46.
    Chan YFY, Bot BM, Zweig M, Tignor N, Ma WP et al. 2018. The asthma mobile health study, smartphone data collected using ResearchKit. Sci. Data 5:180096
    [Google Scholar]
  47. 47.
    Duke Univ 2020. CovIdentify–a Duke University study. Duke University. https://covidentify.covid19.duke.edu
    [Google Scholar]
  48. 48.
    Hershman SG, Bot BM, Shcherbina A, Doerr M, Moayedi Y et al. 2019. Physical activity, sleep and cardiovascular health data for 50,000 individuals from the MyHeart Counts Study. Sci. Data 6:24
    [Google Scholar]
  49. 49.
    Mishra T, Wang M, Metwally AA, Bogu GK, Brooks AW et al. 2020. Pre-symptomatic detection of COVID-19 from smartwatch data. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 4:1208–20
    [Google Scholar]
  50. 50.
    Crouthamel M, Quattrocchi E, Watts S, Wang S, Berry P 2018. Using a ResearchKit smartphone app to collect rheumatoid arthritis symptoms from real-world participants: feasibility study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 6:9e177
    [Google Scholar]
  51. 51.
    Pratap A, Atkin DC, Renn BN, Tanana MJ, Mooney SD et al. 2019. The accuracy of passive phone sensors in predicting daily mood. Depress. Anxiety 36:172–81
    [Google Scholar]
  52. 52.
    Deering S, Pratap A, Suver C, Borelli AJ Jr., Amdur A et al. 2020. Real-world longitudinal data collected from the SleepHealth mobile app study. Sci. Data 7:418
    [Google Scholar]
  53. 53.
    Smarr BL, Aschbacher K, Fisher SM, Chowdhary A, Dilchert S et al. 2020. Feasibility of continuous fever monitoring using wearable devices. Sci. Rep. 10:21640
    [Google Scholar]
  54. 54.
    US Census Bur 2021. Table: United States. QuickFacts: United States, US Census Bureau Washington, DC: updated May 18. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/RHI125219
    [Google Scholar]
  55. 55.
    Cent. Dis. Control Prev 2020. COVID-19. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/index.html
    [Google Scholar]
  56. 56.
    Andrasfay T, Goldman N. 2021. Reductions in 2020 US life expectancy due to COVID-19 and the disproportionate impact on the Black and Latino populations. PNAS 118:5e2014746118
    [Google Scholar]
  57. 57.
    Steinhubl S, Marriott M, Wegerich S. 2015. Remote sensing of vital signs: a wearable, wireless “Band-Aid” sensor with personalized analytics for improved Ebola patient care and worker safety. Glob. Health Sci. Pract. 3:3516–19
    [Google Scholar]
  58. 58.
    Steinhubl S, Feye D, Levine A, Conkright C, Wegerich S, Conkright G 2016. Validation of a portable, deployable system for continuous vital sign monitoring using a multiparametric wearable sensor and personalised analytics in an Ebola treatment centre. BMJ Glob. Health 1:1e000070
    [Google Scholar]
  59. 59.
    Pavithra K, Mary XA, Rajasekaran K, Jegan R 2017. Low cost non-invasive medical device for measuring hemoglobin. 2017 International Conference on Innovations in Electrical, Electronics, Instrumentation and Media Technology (ICEEIMT)197–200 New York: IEEE
    [Google Scholar]
  60. 60.
    Duperron M, Carroll L, Rensing M, Collins S, Zhao Y et al. 2017. Hybrid integration of laser source on silicon photonic integrated circuit for low-cost interferometry medical device. Proc. SPIE 10109:1010915
    [Google Scholar]
  61. 61.
    Tomlinson S, Behrmann S, Cranford J, Louie M, Hashikawa A 2018. Accuracy of smartphone-based pulse oximetry compared with hospital-grade pulse oximetry in healthy children. Telemed. e-Health 24:7527–35
    [Google Scholar]
  62. 62.
    Chuang T, Henebry G, Kimball J, VanRoekel-Patton D, Hildreth M, Wimberly M. 2012. Satellite microwave remote sensing for environmental modeling of mosquito population dynamics. Remote Sens. Environ. 125:147–56
    [Google Scholar]
  63. 63.
    Ledien J, Sorn S, Hem S, Huy R, Buchy P et al. 2017. Assessing the performance of remotely-sensed flooding indicators and their potential contribution to early warning for leptospirosis in Cambodia. PLOS ONE 12:7e0181044
    [Google Scholar]
  64. 64.
    Palaniyandi M, Anand P, Pavendar T. 2017. Environmental risk factors in relation to occurrence of vector borne disease epidemics: remote sensing and GIS for rapid assessment, picturesque, and monitoring towards sustainable health. Int. J. Mosq. Res. 4:39–20
    [Google Scholar]
  65. 65.
    Kumar S, Maheshwari V, Prabhu J, Prasanna M, Jayalakshmi P et al. 2020. Social economic impact of COVID-19 outbreak in India. Int. J. Pervasive Comput. Commun. 16:309–19
    [Google Scholar]
  66. 66.
    Tripathy A, Mohapatra A, Mohanty S, Kougianos E, Joshi A, Das G. 2020. Easyband: a wearable for safety-aware mobility during pandemic outbreak. IEEE Consum. Electron. Mag. 9:557–61
    [Google Scholar]
  67. 67.
    Singh V, Chandna H, Kumar A, Kumar S, Upadhyay N, Utkarsh K 2020. IoT-Q-Band: a low cost internet of things based wearable band to detect and track absconding COVID-19 quarantine subjects. EAI Endorsed Trans. Internet Things 6:214
    [Google Scholar]
  68. 68.
    Mondal M, Roy K, Sarkar S 2020. Design and development of wearable remote temperature monitoring device for smart tracking of COVID-19 fever. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on IoT, Social, Mobile, Analytics & Cloud in Computational Vision & Bio-Engineering (ISMAC-CVB 2020)pp. 66575 Rochester, NY: SSRN http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3735919
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  69. 69.
    Tayal M, Mukherjee A, Chauhan U, Uniyal M, Garg S et al. 2020. Evaluation of remote monitoring device for monitoring vital parameters against reference standard: a diagnostic validation study for COVID-19 preparedness. Indian J. Community Med. 45:2235–39
    [Google Scholar]
  70. 70.
    Chatterjee K, Chatterjee K, Kumar A, Shankar S. 2020. Healthcare impact of COVID-19 epidemic in India: a stochastic mathematical model. Med. J. Armed Forces India 76:2147–55
    [Google Scholar]
  71. 71.
    Arora P, Kumar H, Panigrahi B. 2020. Prediction and analysis of COVID-19 positive cases using deep learning models: a descriptive case study of India. Chaos Solitons Fractals 139:110017
    [Google Scholar]
  72. 72.
    Krishnamurthi R, Gopinathan D, Kumar A 2021. Wearable devices and COVID-19: state of the art, framework, and challenges. Emerging Technologies for Battling Covid-19: Applications and Innovations F Al-Turjman, A Devi, A Nayyar 157–80 Cham, Switz: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  73. 73.
    Witt D, Kellogg R, Snyder M, Dunn J. 2019. Windows into human health through wearables data analytics. Curr. Opin. Biomed. Eng. 9:2846
    [Google Scholar]
  74. 74.
    Jiang F, Jiang Y, Zhi H, Dong Y, Li H et al. 2017. Artificial intelligence in healthcare: past, present and future. Stroke Vasc. Neurol. 2:4230–43
    [Google Scholar]
  75. 75.
    Turkki R, Byckhov D, Lundin M, Isola J, Nordling S et al. 2019. Breast cancer outcome prediction with tumour tissue images and machine learning. Breast Cancer Res. Treatment 177:141–52
    [Google Scholar]
  76. 76.
    Wang H, Hsu W, Lee M, Weng H, Chang S et al. 2019. Automatic machine-learning-based outcome prediction in patients with primary intracerebral hemorrhage. Front. Neurol. 10:910
    [Google Scholar]
  77. 77.
    Yang C, Gardiner L, Wang H, Hueman M, Chen D 2019. Creating prognostic systems for well-differentiated thyroid cancer using machine learning. Front. Endocrinol. 10:288
    [Google Scholar]
  78. 78.
    LeCun Y, Bengio Y, Hinton G. 2015. Deep learning. Nature 521:7553436–44
    [Google Scholar]
  79. 79.
    Quer G, Radin J, Gadaleta M, Baca-Motes K, Ariniello L et al. 2020. Wearable sensor data and self-reported symptoms for COVID-19 detection. Nat. Med. 27:173–77
    [Google Scholar]
  80. 80.
    Ren H, Shen J, Tang X, Feng T. 2020. 5G healthcare applications in COVID-19 prevention and control. 2020 ITU Kaleidoscope: Industry-Driven Digital Transformation1–4 New York: IEEE
    [Google Scholar]
  81. 81.
    Gupta N, Juneja PK, Sharma S, Garg U. 2021. Future aspect of 5G-IoT architecture in smart healthcare system. Proceedings 5th International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Control Systems, ICICCS 2021406–11 New York: IEEE
    [Google Scholar]
  82. 82.
    Stehlik J, Schmalfuss C, Bozkurt B, Nativi-Nicolau J, Wohlfahrt P et al. 2020. Continuous wearable monitoring analytics predict heart failure hospitalization: the LINK-HF multicenter study. Circ. Heart Fail. 13:3e006513
    [Google Scholar]
  83. 83.
    Low CA. 2020. Harnessing consumer smartphone and wearable sensors for clinical cancer research. NPJ Digit. Med. 3:140
    [Google Scholar]
  84. 84.
    Iqbal S, Mahgoub I, Du E, Leavitt M, Asghar W. 2021. Advances in healthcare wearable devices. NPJ Flex. Electron. 5:9
    [Google Scholar]
  85. 85.
    Nikolaev N, Gotchev A, Egiazarian K, Nikolov Z. 2001. Suppression of electromyogram interference on the electrocardiogram by transform domain denoising. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 39:6649–55
    [Google Scholar]
  86. 86.
    D'Aloia M, Longo A, Rizzi M 2019. Noisy ECG signal analysis for automatic peak detection. Information 10:235
    [Google Scholar]
  87. 87.
    Naeini E, Azimi I, Rahmani A, Liljeberg P, Dutt N. 2019. A real-time PPG quality assessment approach for healthcare internet-of-things. Procedia Comput. Sci. 151:551–58
    [Google Scholar]
  88. 88.
    Whiting S, Moreland S, Costello J, Colopy G, McCann C 2018. Recognising cardiac abnormalities in wearable device photoplethysmography (PPG) with deep learning. arXiv:1807.04077 [eess.SP]
  89. 89.
    Satija U, Ramkumar B, Manikandan MS 2018. A review of signal processing techniques for electrocardiogram signal quality assessment. IEEE Rev. Biomed. Eng. 11:36–52
    [Google Scholar]
  90. 90.
    Karimipour A, Homaeinezhad M. 2014. Real-time electrocardiogram P-QRS-T detection-delineation algorithm based on quality-supported analysis of characteristic templates. Comput. Biol. Med. 52:153–65
    [Google Scholar]
  91. 91.
    Krishnan R, Natarajan B, Warren S 2010. Two-stage approach for detection and reduction of motion artifacts in photoplethysmographic data. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 57:81867–76
    [Google Scholar]
  92. 92.
    Selvaraj N, Mendelson Y, Shelley K, Silverman DG, Chon K. 2011. Statistical approach for the detection of motion/noise artifacts in Photoplethysmogram. Proceedings of the Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBS4972–75 New York: IEEE
    [Google Scholar]
  93. 93.
    Elgendi M. 2016. Optimal signal quality index for photoplethysmogram signals. Bioengineering 3:421
    [Google Scholar]
  94. 94.
    Zhao Z, Liu C, Li Y, Li Y, Wang J et al. 2019. Noise rejection for wearable ECGs using modified frequency slice wavelet transform and convolutional neural networks. IEEE Access 7:34060–67
    [Google Scholar]
  95. 95.
    Fu F, Xiang W, An Y, Liu B, Chen Z et al. 2021. Comparison of machine learning algorithms for the quality assessment of wearable ECG signals via Lenovo H3 devices. J. Med. Biol. Eng. 41:2231–40
    [Google Scholar]
  96. 96.
    Sabeti E, Reamaroon N, Mathis M, Gryak J, Sjoding M, Najarian K. 2019. Signal quality measure for pulsatile physiological signals using morphological features: applications in reliability measure for pulse oximetry. Inform. Med. Unlocked 16:100222
    [Google Scholar]
  97. 97.
    Zhang Q, Fu L, Gu L. 2019. A cascaded convolutional neural network for assessing signal quality of dynamic ECG. Comput. Math. Methods Med. 2019:7095137
    [Google Scholar]
  98. 98.
    Fleming S, Tarassenko L 2007. A comparison of signal processing techniques for the extraction of breathing rate from the photoplethysmogram. Int. J. Med. Health Biomed. Bioeng. Pharm. Eng. 1:366–70
    [Google Scholar]
  99. 99.
    Weaver C, Cole C, Lawrence R, von der Groeben J, Fitzgerald J et al. 1968. Digital filtering with applications to electrocardiogram processing. IEEE Trans. Audio Electroacoust. 16:3350–91
    [Google Scholar]
  100. 100.
    Tang SKD, Goh YYS, Wong MLD, Lew YLE 2017. PPG signal reconstruction using a combination of discrete wavelet transform and empirical mode decomposition. International Conference on Intelligent and Advanced Systems, ICIAS 2016pp. 14 New York: IEEE
    [Google Scholar]
  101. 101.
    Liang Y, Elgendi M, Chen Z, Ward R 2018. An optimal filter for short photoplethysmogram signals. Sci. Data 5:180076
    [Google Scholar]
  102. 102.
    Lee J, Kim M, Park H, Kim I 2020. Motion artifact reduction in wearable photoplethysmography based on multi-channel sensors with multiple wavelengths. Sensors 20:51493
    [Google Scholar]
  103. 103.
    Majeed I, Jos S, Arora R, Choi K, Bae S. 2019. Motion artifact removal of photoplethysmogram (PPG) signal. Proceedings of the Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBS5576–80 New York: IEEE
    [Google Scholar]
  104. 104.
    Seok D, Lee S, Kim M, Cho J, Kim C. 2021. Motion artifact removal techniques for wearable EEG and PPG sensor systems. Front. Electron. 2:4
    [Google Scholar]
  105. 105.
    Sukor J, Redmond S, Lovell N 2011. Signal quality measures for pulse oximetry through waveform morphology analysis. Physiol. Meas. 32:3369–84
    [Google Scholar]
  106. 106.
    Masinelli G, Dell'Angola F, Valdés A, Atienza D 2021. SPARE: a spectral peak recovery algorithm for PPG signals pulsewave reconstruction in multimodal wearable devices. Sensors 21:82725
    [Google Scholar]
  107. 107.
    Saquib N, Tarikul Islam Papon M, Ahmad I, Rahman A 2015. Measurement of heart rate using photoplethysmography. 2015 International Conference on Networking Systems and Security1–6 New York: IEEE
    [Google Scholar]
  108. 108.
    Johnson MA, Jegan R, Mary XA 2017. Performance measures on blood pressure and heart rate measurement from PPG signal for biomedical applications. 2017 International Conference on Innovations in Electrical, Electronics, Instrumentation and Media Technology (ICIEEIMT)311–15 New York: IEEE
    [Google Scholar]
  109. 109.
    Reiss A, Indlekofer I, Schmidt P, Van Laerhoven K. 2019. Deep PPG: large-scale heart rate estimation with convolutional neural networks. Sensors 19:143079
    [Google Scholar]
  110. 110.
    Charlton P, Birrenkott D, Bonnici T, Pimentel M, Johnson A et al. 2018. Breathing rate estimation from the electrocardiogram and photoplethysmogram: a review. IEEE Rev. Biomed. Eng. 11:2–20
    [Google Scholar]
  111. 111.
    Bourdillon N, Schmitt L, Yazdani S, Vesin J, Millet G. 2017. Minimal window duration for accurate HRV recording in athletes. Front. Neurosci. 11:456
    [Google Scholar]
  112. 112.
    Eerikainen L, Bonomi A, Schipper F, Dekker L, Vullings R et al. 2018. Comparison between electrocardiogram- and photoplethysmogram-derived features for atrial fibrillation detection in free-living conditions. Physiol. Meas. 39:084001
    [Google Scholar]
  113. 113.
    Bonomi A, Schipper F, Eerikainen L, Margarito J, Aarts R et al. 2016. Atrial fibrillation detection using photo-plethysmography and acceleration data at the wrist. Computing in Cardiology277–80 New York: IEEE
    [Google Scholar]
  114. 114.
    Solosenko A, Petrenas A, Paliakaite B, Sörnmo L, Marozas V. 2019. Detection of atrial fibrillation using a wrist-worn device. Physiol. Meas. 40:2025003
    [Google Scholar]
  115. 115.
    Lazaro J, Reljin N, Hossain M, Noh Y, Laguna P, Chon K. 2020. Wearable armband device for daily life electrocardiogram monitoring. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 67:123464–73
    [Google Scholar]
  116. 116.
    Spierer D, Rosen Z, Litman L, Fujii K 2015. Validation of photoplethysmography as a method to detect heart rate during rest and exercise. J. Med. Eng. Technol. 39:5264–71
    [Google Scholar]
  117. 117.
    Sartor F, Papini G, Cox LGE, Cleland J 2018. Methodological shortcomings of wrist-worn heart rate monitors validations. J. Med. Internet Res. 20:7e10108
    [Google Scholar]
  118. 118.
    Galarnyk M, Quer G, McLaughlin K, Ariniello L, Steinhubl S 2019. Usability of a wrist-worn smartwatch in a direct-to-participant randomized pragmatic clinical trial. Digit. Biomark. 3:3176–84
    [Google Scholar]
  119. 119.
    Yilmaz T, Foster R, Hao Y 2010. Detecting vital signs with wearable wireless sensors. Sensors 10:1210837–62
    [Google Scholar]
  120. 120.
    Pierson E, Althoff T, Thomas D, Hillard P, Leskovec J 2021. Daily, weekly, seasonal and menstrual cycles in women's mood, behaviour and vital signs. Nat. Hum. Behav. 5:6716–25
    [Google Scholar]
  121. 121.
    Roussel B, Buguet A. 1982. Changes in human heart rate during sleep following daily physical exercise. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. Occupat. Physiol. 49:3409–16
    [Google Scholar]
  122. 122.
    Hart T, Swartz A, Cashin S, Strath S. 2011. How many days of monitoring predict physical activity and sedentary behaviour in older adults?. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Activ. 8:62
    [Google Scholar]
  123. 123.
    Prescott S, Traynor J, Shilliday I, Zanotto T, Rush R, Mercer T. 2020. Minimum accelerometer wear-time for reliable estimates of physical activity and sedentary behaviour of people receiving haemodialysis. BMC Nephrol. 21:1230
    [Google Scholar]
  124. 124.
    Leger D, Tonetti L, Gauriau C, Faraut B, Elbaz M et al. 2019. A study on the optimal length of actigraphic recording in narcolepsy type 1. Clin. Neurophysiol. Pract. 4:114–18
    [Google Scholar]
  125. 125.
    Rousson V, Zumbrunn T. 2011. Decision curve analysis revisited: overall net benefit, relationships to ROC curve analysis, and application to case-control studies. BMC Med. Informat. Decis. Making 11:145
    [Google Scholar]
  126. 126.
    Mishra T, Wang M, Metwally A, Bogu G, Brooks A et al. 2020. Pre-symptomatic detection of COVID-19 from smartwatch data. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 4:121208–20
    [Google Scholar]
  127. 127.
    Radin J, Quer G, Steinhubl S. 2018. Can wearable sensors detect influenza epidemics? Correlation of anomalous Fitbit data with influenza surveillance data. Presented at the 10th International Conference on Emerging Infectious Diseases (ICEID), Atlanta, Aug. 26–29 (Abstr.)
    [Google Scholar]
  128. 128.
    Wee B, Lee J, Mok Y, Chong S. 2020. A narrative review of heart rate and variability in sepsis. Ann. Transl. Med. 8:12768
    [Google Scholar]
  129. 129.
    Ahmad S, Ramsay T, Huebsch L, Flanagan S, McDiarmid S et al. 2009. Continuous multi-parameter heart rate variability analysis heralds onset of sepsis in adults. PLOS ONE 4:8e6642
    [Google Scholar]
  130. 130.
    Ahmad S, Tejuja A, Newman K, Zarychanski R, Seely A 2009. Clinical review: a review and analysis of heart rate variability and the diagnosis and prognosis of infection. Crit. Care 13:232
    [Google Scholar]
  131. 131.
    Shimabukuro D, Barton C, Feldman M, Mataraso S, Das R 2017. Effect of a machine learning-based severe sepsis prediction algorithm on patient survival and hospital length of stay: a randomised clinical trial. BMJ Open Respirat. Res. 4:1e000234
    [Google Scholar]
  132. 132.
    Burdick H, Pino E, Gabel-Comeau D, McCoy A, Gu C et al. 2020. Effect of a sepsis prediction algorithm on patient mortality, length of stay and readmission: a prospective multicentre clinical outcomes evaluation of real-world patient data from US hospitals. BMJ Health Care Informat. 27:1e100109
    [Google Scholar]
  133. 133.
    Wong A, Otles E, Donnelly J, Krumm A, McCullough J et al. 2021. External validation of a widely implemented proprietary sepsis prediction model in hospitalized patients. JAMA Intern. Med. 181:1065–70
    [Google Scholar]
  134. 134.
    Zhu G, Li J, Meng Z, Yu Y, Li Y et al. 2020. Learning from large-scale wearable device data for predicting the epidemic trend of COVID-19. Discrete Dyn. Nat. Soc. 2020:6152041
    [Google Scholar]
  135. 135.
    Ong J, Lau T, Karsikas M, Kinnunen H, Chee M. 2021. A longitudinal analysis of COVID-19 lockdown stringency on sleep and resting heart rate measures across 20 countries. Sci. Rep. 11:114413
    [Google Scholar]
  136. 136.
    Kogan N, Clemente L, Liautaud P, Kaashoek J, Link N et al. 2021. An early warning approach to monitor COVID-19 activity with multiple digital traces in near real time. Sci. Adv. 7:10eabd6989
    [Google Scholar]
  137. 137.
    Li X, Dunn J, Salins D, Zhou G, Zhou W et al. 2017. Digital health: tracking physiomes and activity using wearable biosensors reveals useful health-related information. PLOS Biol. 15:1e2001402
    [Google Scholar]
  138. 138.
    Bradshaw B, Konty K, Ramirez E, Lee W, Signorini A, Foschini L. 2019. Influenza surveillance using wearable mobile health devices. Online J. Public Health Inform. 11:1e249
    [Google Scholar]
  139. 139.
    Miller D, Capodilupo J, Lastella M, Sargent C, Roach G et al. 2020. Analyzing changes in respiratory rate to predict the risk of COVID-19 infection. PLOS ONE 15:12e0243693
    [Google Scholar]
  140. 140.
    Alavi A, Bogu GK, Wang M, Rangan ES, Brooks AWet al 2022. Real-time alerting system for COVID-19 and other stress events using wearable data. Nat. Med 2817584
    [Google Scholar]
  141. 141.
    Smarr B, Aschbacher K, Fisher S, Chowdhary A, Dilchert S et al. 2020. Feasibility of continuous fever monitoring using wearable devices. Sci. Rep. 10:21640
    [Google Scholar]
  142. 142.
    Hirten R, Danieletto M, Tomalin L, Choi K, Zweig M et al. 2021. Use of physiological data from a wearable device to identify SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptoms and predict COVID-19 diagnosis: observational study. J. Med. Internet Res. 23:2e26107
    [Google Scholar]
  143. 143.
    Natarajan A, Su H, Heneghan C. 2020. Assessment of physiological signs associated with COVID-19 measured using wearable devices. NPJ Digit. Med. 3:156
    [Google Scholar]
  144. 144.
    Shapiro A, Marinsek N, Clay I, Bradshaw B, Ramirez E et al. 2021. Characterizing COVID-19 and influenza illnesses in the real world via person-generated health data. Patterns 2:1100188
    [Google Scholar]
  145. 145.
    Larimer K, Wegerich S, Splan J, Chestek D, Prendergast H, Van den Hoek T 2021. Personalized analytics and a wearable biosensor platform for early detection of COVID-19 decompensation (DeCODe): protocol for the development of the COVID-19 decompensation index. JMIR Res. Protoc. 10:5e27271
    [Google Scholar]
  146. 146.
    Empatica 2021. Empatica receives first of its kind European CE mark for early detection of COVID-19 News Release, March 9. https://www.empatica.com/blog/aura-and-care-receive-ce-mark-for-early-detection-of-covid-19-and-other-respiratory-infections.html
    [Google Scholar]
  147. 147.
    Radin J, Quer G, Ramos E, Baca-Motes K, Gadaleta M et al. 2021. Assessment of prolonged physiological and behavioral changes associated with COVID-19 infection. JAMA Netw. Open 4:7e2115959
    [Google Scholar]
  148. 148.
    Haas E, Angulo F, McLaughlin J, Anis E, Singer S et al. 2021. Impact and effectiveness of mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 infections and COVID-19 cases, hospitalisations, and deaths following a nationwide vaccination campaign in Israel: an observational study using national surveillance data. Lancet 397:102871819–29
    [Google Scholar]
  149. 149.
    Presby D, Capodilupo E. 2021. Objective and subjective COVID-19 vaccine reactogenicity by age and vaccine manufacturer. medRxiv 2021.04.29.21256255
  150. 150.
    Quer G, Gadaleta M, Radin J, Andersen K, Baca-Motes K et al. 2021. The physiologic response to COVID-19 vaccination. medRxiv 2021.05.03.21256482. https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.05.03.21256482
    [Crossref]
  151. 151.
    Shandhi M, Goldsack J, Ryan K, Bennion A, Kotla Aet al 2021. Recent academic research on clinically relevant digital measures: systematic review. J. Med. Internet Res 239e29875
    [Google Scholar]
  152. 152.
    Gadaleta M, Radin JM, Baca-Motes K, Ramos E, Kheterpal Vet al 2021. Passive detection of COVID-19 with wearable sensors and explainable machine learning algorithms. NPJ Digit. Med 4166
    [Google Scholar]
  153. 153.
    Richards DM, Tweardy MJ, Steinhubl SR, Chestek DW, Vanden Hoek TLet al 2021. Wearable sensor derived decompensation index for continuous remote monitoring of COVID-19 diagnosed patients. NPJ Digit. Med 4155
    [Google Scholar]
  154. 154.
    Grzesiak E, Bent B, McClain MT, Woods CW, Tsalik ELet al 2021. Assessment of the feasibility of using noninvasive wearable biometric monitoring sensors to detect influenza and the common cold before symptom onset. JAMA Netw. Open 49e2128534
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-103020-040136
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-103020-040136
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplementary Data

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error