↓ Skip to main content

Feasibility of Using a Wearable Biosensor Device in Patients at Risk for Alzheimer’s Disease Dementia

Overview of attention for article published in The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease, October 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
171 Mendeley
Title
Feasibility of Using a Wearable Biosensor Device in Patients at Risk for Alzheimer’s Disease Dementia
Published in
The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease, October 2019
DOI 10.14283/jpad.2019.39
Pubmed ID
Authors

N. Saif, P. Yan, K. Niotis, O. Scheyer, A. Rahman, M. Berkowitz, R. Krikorian, H. Hristov, G. Sadek, S. Bellara, Richard S. Isaacson

Abstract

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common and most costly chronic neurodegenerative disease globally. AD develops over an extended period prior to cognitive symptoms, leaving a "window of opportunity" for targeted risk-reduction interventions. Further, this pre-dementia phase includes early physiological changes in sleep and autonomic regulation, for which wearable biosensor devices may offer a convenient and cost-effective method to assess AD-risk. Patients with a family history of AD and no or minimal cognitive complaints were recruited from the Alzheimer's Prevention Clinic at Weill Cornell Medicine and New York-Presbyterian. Of the 40 consecutive patients screened, 34 (85%) agreed to wear a wearable biosensor device (WHOOP). One subject (2.5%) lost the device prior to data collection. Of the remaining subjects, 24 were classified as normal cognition and were asymptomatic, 6 were classified as subjective cognitive decline, and 3 were amyloid-positive (one with pre-clinical AD, one with pre-clinical Lewy-Body Dementia, and one with mild cognitive impairment due to AD). Sleep-cycle, autonomic (heart rate variability [HRV]) and activity measures were collected via WHOOP. Blood biomarkers and neuropsychological testing sensitive to cognitive changes in pre-clinical AD were obtained. Participants completed surveys assessing their sleep-patterns, exercise habits, and attitudes towards WHOOP. The goal of this prospective observational study was to determine the feasibility of using a wrist-worn biosensor device in patients at-risk for AD dementia. Unsupervised machine learning was performed to first separate participants into distinct phenotypic groups using the multivariate biometric data. Additional statistical analyses were conducted to examine correlations between individual biometric measures and cognitive performance. 27 (81.8%) participants completed the follow-up surveys. Twenty-four participants (88.9%) were satisfied with WHOOP after six months, and twenty-three (85.2%) wanted to continue wearing WHOOP. K-means clustering separated participants into two groups. Group 1 was older, had lower HRV, and spent more time in slow-wave sleep (SWS) than Group 2. Group 1 performed better on two cognitive tests assessing executive function: Flanker Inhibitory Attention/Control (FIAC) (p=.031), and Dimensional Change Card Sort (DCCS) (p=.061). In Group 1, DCCS was correlated with SWS (ρ=.68, p=0.024) and HRV (ρ=.6, p=0.019). In Group 2, DCCS was correlated with HRV (ρ=.55, p=0.018). There were no significant differences in blood biomarkers between the two groups. Wearable biosensor devices may be a feasible tool to assess AD-related physiological changes. Longitudinal collection of sleep and HRV data may potentially be a non-invasive method for monitoring cognitive changes related to pre-clinical AD. Further study is warranted in larger populations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 171 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 171 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 11%
Student > Bachelor 18 11%
Researcher 17 10%
Professor 6 4%
Other 16 9%
Unknown 77 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 10%
Psychology 11 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 6%
Neuroscience 10 6%
Engineering 9 5%
Other 25 15%
Unknown 89 52%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 January 2022.
All research outputs
#2,239,200
of 25,387,668 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease
#130
of 595 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,892
of 366,395 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease
#4
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,387,668 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 595 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 366,395 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.