Dror Ben-Zeev1, Rui Wang1, Saeed Abdullah1, Rachel Brian1, Emily A Scherer1, Lisa A Mistler1, Marta Hauser1, John M Kane1, Andrew Campbell1, Tanzeem Choudhury1. 1. Dr. Ben-Zeev and Ms. Brian are with the Psychiatric Research Center and the Department of Psychiatry, Dr. Scherer is with the Department of Community and Family Medicine and the Department of Biomedical Data Science, and Dr. Mistler is with the Department of Psychiatry, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, New Hampshire (e-mail: dror.ben-zeev@dartmouth.edu ). Mr. Wang and Dr. Campbell are with the Department of Computer Science, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire. Mr. Abdullah and Dr. Choudhury are with the Department of Information Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York. Dr. Hauser and Dr. Kane are with the Department of Psychiatry Research, Zucker Hillside Hospital, Glen Oaks, New York.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the feasibility, acceptability, and utility of behavioral sensing among individuals with schizophrenia. METHODS: Nine outpatients and 11 inpatients carried smartphones for two- or one-week periods, respectively. Device-embedded sensors (accelerometers, microphone, global positioning system, WiFi, and Bluetooth) collected behavioral data and ascertained the patients' location, activity, and exposure to human speech as they went about their day. Participants rated this approach by completing usability and acceptability measures. RESULTS: Sensing successfully captured individuals' activity, time spent proximal to human speech, and time spent in various locations. Participants felt comfortable using the sensing system (95%), and most were interested in receiving feedback (65%) and suggestions (65%). Approximately 20% reported that sensing made them upset. One-third of inpatients were concerned about their privacy, but no outpatients expressed this concern. CONCLUSIONS: Mobile behavioral sensing was a feasible, acceptable, and informative approach for data collection among outpatients and inpatients with schizophrenia.
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the feasibility, acceptability, and utility of behavioral sensing among individuals with schizophrenia. METHODS: Nine outpatients and 11 inpatients carried smartphones for two- or one-week periods, respectively. Device-embedded sensors (accelerometers, microphone, global positioning system, WiFi, and Bluetooth) collected behavioral data and ascertained the patients' location, activity, and exposure to human speech as they went about their day. Participants rated this approach by completing usability and acceptability measures. RESULTS: Sensing successfully captured individuals' activity, time spent proximal to human speech, and time spent in various locations. Participants felt comfortable using the sensing system (95%), and most were interested in receiving feedback (65%) and suggestions (65%). Approximately 20% reported that sensing made them upset. One-third of inpatients were concerned about their privacy, but no outpatients expressed this concern. CONCLUSIONS: Mobile behavioral sensing was a feasible, acceptable, and informative approach for data collection among outpatients and inpatients with schizophrenia.
Authors: Cathal Gurrin; Zhengwei Qiu; Mark Hughes; Niamh Caprani; Aiden R Doherty; Steve E Hodges; Alan F Smeaton Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2013-03 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Dror Ben-Zeev; Christopher J Brenner; Mark Begale; Jennifer Duffecy; David C Mohr; Kim T Mueser Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2014-03-08 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Maria Faurholt-Jepsen; Mads Frost; Maj Vinberg; Ellen Margrethe Christensen; Jakob E Bardram; Lars Vedel Kessing Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2014-03-13 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Colin A Depp; Jenni Ceglowski; Vicki C Wang; Faraz Yaghouti; Brent T Mausbach; Wesley K Thompson; Eric L Granholm Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2014-11-08 Impact factor: 4.839
Authors: John Ainsworth; Jasper E Palmier-Claus; Matthew Machin; Christine Barrowclough; Graham Dunn; Anne Rogers; Iain Buchan; Emma Barkus; Shitij Kapur; Til Wykes; Richard S Hopkins; Shôn Lewis Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2013-04-05 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: John Torous; Steven Richard Chan; Shih Yee-Marie Tan; Jacob Behrens; Ian Mathew; Erich J Conrad; Ladson Hinton; Peter Yellowlees; Matcheri Keshavan Journal: JMIR Ment Health Date: 2014-12-23
Authors: Benjamin Buck; Kevin A Hallgren; Emily Scherer; Rachel Brian; Rui Wang; Weichen Wang; Andrew Campbell; Tanzeem Choudhury; Marta Hauser; John M Kane; Dror Ben-Zeev Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2019-06-10 Impact factor: 4.791
Authors: Dror Ben-Zeev; Emily A Scherer; Rachel M Brian; Lisa A Mistler; Andrew T Campbell; Rui Wang Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2017-07-03 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Benjamin Buck; Emily Scherer; Rachel Brian; Rui Wang; Weichen Wang; Andrew Campbell; Tanzeem Choudhury; Marta Hauser; John M Kane; Dror Ben-Zeev Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2019-03-30 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: John A Naslund; Kelly A Aschbrenner; Emily A Scherer; Gregory J McHugo; Lisa A Marsch; Stephen J Bartels Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2016-07-02 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Dror Ben-Zeev; Rachel Brian; Rui Wang; Weichen Wang; Andrew T Campbell; Min S H Aung; Michael Merrill; Vincent W S Tseng; Tanzeem Choudhury; Marta Hauser; John M Kane; Emily A Scherer Journal: Psychiatr Rehabil J Date: 2017-04-03
Authors: Ian M Raugh; Sydney H James; Cristina M Gonzalez; Hannah C Chapman; Alex S Cohen; Brian Kirkpatrick; Gregory P Strauss Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2020-12-01 Impact factor: 9.306