| Literature DB >> 26740354 |
Till Beiwinkel1, Sally Kindermann, Andreas Maier, Christopher Kerl, Jörn Moock, Guido Barbian, Wulf Rössler.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Relapse prevention in bipolar disorder can be improved by monitoring symptoms in patients' daily life. Smartphone apps are easy-to-use, low-cost tools that can be used to assess this information. To date, few studies have examined the usefulness of smartphone data for monitoring symptoms in bipolar disorder.Entities:
Keywords: activity patterns; bipolar disorder; communication patterns; monitoring; phase transitions; sensor technology; smartphone
Year: 2016 PMID: 26740354 PMCID: PMC4720836 DOI: 10.2196/mental.4560
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JMIR Ment Health ISSN: 2368-7959
Figure 1Study flow chart.
Sample characteristics for 13 patients.
| Characteristic | N | Value | |
| Age in years, mean (SD) | 13 | 47.2 (3.8) | |
|
| |||
|
| Male | 8 | 61.5 |
|
| Female | 5 | 38.5 |
|
| |||
|
| Lower secondary | 9 | 69.2 |
|
| Upper secondary | 4 | 30.8 |
|
| |||
|
| None | 1 | 7.7 |
|
| Vocational | 10 | 76.9 |
|
| University level | 2 | 15.4 |
|
| |||
|
| Yes | 4 | 30.8 |
|
| No | 9 | 69.2 |
|
| |||
|
| Bipolar I | 6 | 46.1 |
|
| Bipolar II | 7 | 53.9 |
| Years since first diagnosis, mean (SD) | 13 | 9.9 (3.1) | |
| Manic episodes, mean (SD) | 13 | 8.6 (1.6) | |
| Depressive episodes, mean (SD) | 13 | 12.3 (3.0) | |
| Total hospitalizations, mean (SD) | 13 | 6.9 (2.8) | |
|
| |||
|
| Yes | 11 | 84.2 |
|
| No | 2 | 15.4 |
| Study duration in days, mean (SD) | 13 | 365.1 (31.9) | |
| Length of assessment period, mean (SD) | 13 | 68.6 (23.6) | |
Total available data points for self-reported data, activity data, social data, and clinical data collected by 13 patients.
| N | Mean (SD) | Min/Max | Rate, % | |
| Self-reported | 2456 | 188.9 (83.3) | 24/291 | 55.7 |
| Activity | 3537 | 272.1 (74.9) | 154/362 | 78.2 |
| Social | 2624 | 201.8 (109.3) | 9/339 | 56.1 |
| Clinical | 75 | 5.8 (1.4) | 3/8 | NA |
Mean levels, interquartile range, and range for smartphone indicators and clinical variables for 13 patients.
| Variable | Mean (SD) | Interquartile Range | Min/Max | |
|
| ||||
| Mood | 6.7 (1.7) | 2.0 | 1/10 | |
|
| ||||
| Distance traveled, km | 10.5 (41.5) | 6.3 | 0/732 | |
| Cell tower changes | 10.5 (17.0) | 10.0 | 0/139 | |
| Device activity, % of day | 7.3 (8.2) | 9.2 | 0/75 | |
|
| ||||
| Number outgoing calls | 2.9 (3.6) | 4.0 | 0 /29 | |
| Duration outgoing calls, minutes | 10.2 (19.6) | 11.3 | 0/181 | |
| Outgoing SMS | 1.7 (3.6) | 2.0 | 0/54 | |
|
| ||||
| YMRS | 2.7 (3.6) | 4.0 | 0/18 | |
| HAMD | 5.1 (5.3) | 9.0 | 0/18 | |
Between-patient relationship of self-reported data, activity data, and social smartphone data with bipolar disorder symptoms for 13 patients based on 75 clinical ratingsa.
|
| Beta ( | ||||
| Self-report | Activity | Social | Combined | ||
| Model 1 (N=74) | Model 2 (N=62) | Model 3 (N=71) | Model 4 (N=62) | ||
|
| |||||
|
| YMRS | -.09 (.45) |
|
| .05 (.79) |
|
| HAMD | -.42 (<.001) |
|
| -.56 (<.001) |
|
| |||||
|
| YMRS |
| -.46 (.01) |
| -.37 (<.001) |
|
| HAMD |
| -.24 (.12) |
| -.12 (.34) |
|
| |||||
|
| YMRS |
| -.24 (.29) |
| -.14 (.12) |
|
| HAMD |
| .08 (.58) |
| -.04 (.82) |
|
| |||||
|
| YMRS |
| .31 (.24) |
| .26 (.12) |
|
| HAMD |
| -.01 (.92) |
| -.06 (.80) |
|
| |||||
|
| YMRS |
|
| .19 (.38) | .48 (.03) |
|
| HAMD |
|
| .34 (.17) | .08 (.65) |
|
| |||||
|
| YMRS |
|
| .17 (.45) | -.08 (.72) |
|
| HAMD |
|
| -.22 (.25) | .03 (.83) |
|
| |||||
|
| YMRS |
|
| .03 (.72) | -.02 (.65) |
|
| HAMD |
|
| .04 (.84) | -.17 (<.001) |
aStandardized effects of random coefficient regression models with smartphone data as predictor of depressive symptom levels (YMRS) and manic symptom levels (HAMD).
Within-patient relationship of change in self-report, activity, and social smartphone data with change in bipolar disorder symptoms for 13 patientsa.
|
| Beta ( | ||||
| Self-report | Activity | Social | Combined | ||
| Model 1 (N=74) | Model 2 (N=62) | Model 3 (N=71) | Model 4 (N=62) | ||
|
| |||||
|
| YMRS | -.09 (.28) |
|
| .03 (.73) |
|
| HAMD | -.18 (.10) |
|
| -.09 (.26) |
|
| |||||
|
| YMRS |
| .03 (.40) |
| .01 (.85) |
|
| HAMD |
| .07 (.23) |
| .03 (.66) |
|
| |||||
|
| YMRS |
| -.10 (.03) |
| -.17 (<.001) |
|
| HAMD |
| -.17 (<.001) |
| -.11 (.03) |
|
| |||||
|
| YMRS |
| -.11 (.17) |
| -.07 (.26) |
|
| HAMD |
| -.15 (.09) |
| .02 (.87) |
|
| |||||
|
| YMRS |
|
| .18 (.34) | .24 (.44) |
|
| HAMD |
|
| -.07 (.60) | -.07 (.73) |
|
| |||||
|
| YMRS |
|
| -.25 (.27) | -.34 (.24) |
|
| HAMD |
|
| -.07 (.63) | -.09 (.58) |
|
| |||||
|
| YMRS |
|
| -.05 (.35) | .03 (.68) |
|
| HAMD |
|
| -.30 (<.001) | -.28 (<.001) |
aStandardized effects of random coefficient regression models with smartphone data as predictor of depressive symptom change (YMRS) and manic symptom change (HAMD).
Figure 2Between-patient analysis of smartphone data and symptom levels.
Figure 3Within-patient analysis of smartphone data and symptom change.