Traditional screening for COVID-19 typically includes survey questions about symptoms and travel history, as well as temperature measurements. Here, we explore whether personal sensor data collected over time may help identify subtle changes indicating an infection, such as in patients with COVID-19. We have developed a smartphone app that collects smartwatch and activity tracker data, as well as self-reported symptoms and diagnostic testing results, from individuals in the United States, and have assessed whether symptom and sensor data can differentiate COVID-19 positive versus negative cases in symptomatic individuals. We enrolled 30,529 participants between 25 March and 7 June 2020, of whom 3,811 reported symptoms. Of these symptomatic individuals, 54 reported testing positive and 279 negative for COVID-19. We found that a combination of symptom and sensor data resulted in an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.80 (interquartile range (IQR): 0.73-0.86) for discriminating between symptomatic individuals who were positive or negative for COVID-19, a performance that is significantly better (P < 0.01) than a model 1 that considers symptoms alone (AUC = 0.71; IQR: 0.63-0.79). Such continuous, passively captured data may be complementary to virus testing, which is generally a one-off or infrequent sampling assay. Owing to the current lack of fast and reliable testing, one of the greatest challenges for preventing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is the ability to quickly identify, trace and isolate cases before they can further spread the infection to susceptible individuals. As regions across the United States start implementing measures to reopen businesses, schools and other activities, many rely on current screening practices for COVID-19, which typically include a combination of symptom and travel-related survey questions and temperature measurements. However, this method is likely to miss pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic cases, which make up ~40-45% of those infected with SARS-CoV-2, and who can still be infectious 1,2. An elevated temperature (>100 °F (>37.8 °C)) is not as common as frequently believed, being present in only 12% of individuals who tested positive for COVID-19 3 and just 31% of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (at the time of admission) 4. Smartwatches and activity trackers, which are now worn by one in five Americans 5 , can improve our ability to objectively characterize each individual's unique baseline for resting heart rate 6 , sleep 7 and activity and can therefore be used to identify subtle changes in that user's data that may indicate that they are coming down with a viral illness. Previous research from our group has shown that this method, when aggregated at the population level, can significantly improve real-time predictions for influenza-like illness 8. Consequently, we created a prospective app-based research platform, called DETECT (Digital Engagement and Tracking for Early Control and Treatment), where individuals can share their sensor data, self-reported symptoms, diagnoses and ele...

IMPORTANCE Opportunistic screening for atrial fibrillation (AF) is recommended, and improved methods of early identification could allow for the initiation of appropriate therapies to prevent the adverse health outcomes associated with AF.OBJECTIVE To determine the effect of a self-applied wearable electrocardiogram (ECG) patch in detecting AF and the clinical consequences associated with such a detection strategy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSA direct-to-participant randomized clinical trial and prospective matched observational cohort study were conducted among members of a large national health plan. Recruitment began November 17, 2015, and was completed on October 4, 2016, and 1-year claims-based follow-up concluded in January 2018. For the clinical trial, 2659 individuals were randomized to active home-based monitoring to start immediately or delayed by 4 months. For the observational study, 2 deidentified age-, sex-and CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc-matched controls were selected for each actively monitored individual. INTERVENTIONSThe actively monitored cohort wore a self-applied continuous ECG monitoring patch at home during routine activities for up to 4 weeks, initiated either immediately after enrolling (n = 1364) or delayed for 4 months after enrollment (n = 1291). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary end point was the incidence of a new diagnosis of AF at 4 months among those randomized to immediate monitoring vs delayed monitoring. A secondary end point was new AF diagnosis at 1 year in the combined actively monitored groups vs matched observational controls. Other outcomes included new prescriptions for anticoagulants and health care utilization (outpatient cardiology visits, primary care visits, or AF-related emergency department visits and hospitalizations) at 1 year. RESULTSThe randomized groups included 2659 participants (mean [SD] age, 72.4 [7.3] years; 38.6% women), of whom 1738 (65.4%) completed active monitoring. The observational study comprised 5214 (mean [SD] age, 73.7 [7.0] years; 40.5% women; median CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score, 3.0), including 1738 actively monitored individuals from the randomized trial and 3476 matched controls. In the randomized study, new AF was identified by 4 months in 3.9% (53/1366) of the immediate group vs 0.9% (12/1293) in the delayed group (absolute difference, 3.0% [95% CI, 1.8%-4.1%]). At 1 year, AF was newly diagnosed in 109 monitored (6.7 per 100 person-years) and 81 unmonitored (2.6 per 100 person-years; difference, 4.1 [95% CI, 3.9-4.2]) individuals. Active monitoring was associated with increased initiation of anticoagulants (5.7 vs 3.7 per 100 personyears; difference, 2.0 [95% CI, 1.9-2.2]), outpatient cardiology visits (33.5 vs 26.0 per 100 personyears; difference, 7.5 [95% CI, 7.2-7.9), and primary care visits (83.5 vs 82.6 per 100 person-years; difference, 0.9 [95% CI, 0.4-1.5]). There was no difference in AF-related emergency department visits and hospitalizations (1.3 vs 1.4 per 100 person-years; difference, 0.1 [95% CI, −0.1 to 0]).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE ...

Background. Mobile health and digital medicine technologies are becoming increasingly used by individuals with common, chronic diseases to monitor their health. Numerous devices, sensors, and apps are available to patients and consumers–some of which have been shown to lead to improved health management and health outcomes. However, no randomized controlled trials have been conducted which examine health care costs, and most have failed to provide study participants with a truly comprehensive monitoring system. Methods. We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial of adults who had submitted a 2012 health insurance claim associated with hypertension, diabetes, and/or cardiac arrhythmia. The intervention involved receipt of one or more mobile devices that corresponded to their condition(s) (hypertension: Withings Blood Pressure Monitor; diabetes: Sanofi iBGStar Blood Glucose Meter; arrhythmia: AliveCor Mobile ECG) and an iPhone with linked tracking applications for a period of 6 months; the control group received a standard disease management program. Moreover, intervention study participants received access to an online health management system which provided participants detailed device tracking information over the course of the study. This was a monitoring system designed by leveraging collaborations with device manufacturers, a connected health leader, health care provider, and employee wellness program–making it both unique and inclusive. We hypothesized that health resource utilization with respect to health insurance claims may be influenced by the monitoring intervention. We also examined health-self management. Results & Conclusions. There was little evidence of differences in health care costs or utilization as a result of the intervention. Furthermore, we found evidence that the control and intervention groups were equivalent with respect to most health care utilization outcomes. This result suggests there are not large short-term increases or decreases in health care costs or utilization associated with monitoring chronic health conditions using mobile health or digital medicine technologies. Among secondary outcomes there was some evidence of improvement in health self-management which was characterized by a decrease in the propensity to view health status as due to chance factors in the intervention group.

ObjectivesThe advent of large databases, wearable technology, and novel communications methods has the potential to expand the pool of candidate research participants and offer them the flexibility and convenience of participating in remote research. However, reports of their effectiveness are sparse. We assessed the use of various forms of outreach within a nationwide randomized clinical trial being conducted entirely by remote means.MethodsCandidate participants at possibly higher risk for atrial fibrillation were identified by means of a large insurance claims database and invited to participate in the study by their insurance provider. Enrolled participants were randomly assigned to one of two groups testing a wearable sensor device for detection of the arrhythmia.ResultsOver 10 months, the various outreach methods used resulted in enrollment of 2659 participants meeting eligibility criteria. Starting with a baseline enrollment rate of 0.8% in response to an email invitation, the recruitment campaign was iteratively optimized to ultimately include website changes and the use of a five-step outreach process (three short, personalized emails and two direct mailers) that highlighted the appeal of new technology used in the study, resulting in an enrollment rate of 9.4%. Messaging that highlighted access to new technology outperformed both appeals to altruism and appeals that highlighted accessing personal health information.ConclusionsTargeted outreach, enrollment, and management of large remote clinical trials is feasible and can be improved with an iterative approach, although more work is needed to learn how to best recruit and retain potential research participants.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.govNCT02506244. Registered 23 July 2015.

Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common, often without symptoms, and is an independent risk factor for mortality, stroke and heart failure. It is unknown if screening asymptomatic individuals for AF can improve clinical outcomes. Methods mSToPS was a pragmatic, direct-to-participant trial that randomized individuals from a single US-wide health plan to either immediate or delayed screening using a continuous-recording ECG patch to be worn for two weeks and 2 occasions, ~3 months apart, to potentially detect undiagnosed AF. The 3-year outcomes component of the trial was designed to compare clinical outcomes in the combined cohort of 1718 individuals who underwent monitoring and 3371 matched observational controls. The prespecified primary outcome was the time to first event of the combined endpoint of death, stroke, systemic embolism, or myocardial infarction among individuals with a new AF diagnosis, which was hypothesized to be the same in the two cohorts but was not realized. Results Over the 3 years following the initiation of screening (mean follow-up 29 months), AF was newly diagnosed in 11.4% (n = 196) of screened participants versus 7.7% (n = 261) of observational controls (p<0.01). Among the screened cohort with incident AF, one-third were diagnosed through screening. For all individuals whose AF was first diagnosed clinically, a clinical event was common in the 4 weeks surrounding that diagnosis: 6.6% experienced a stroke,10.2% were newly diagnosed with heart failure, 9.2% had a myocardial infarction, and 1.5% systemic emboli. Cumulatively, 42.9% were hospitalized. For those diagnosed via screening, none experienced a stroke, myocardial infarction or systemic emboli in the period surrounding their AF diagnosis, and only 1 person (2.3%) had a new diagnosis of heart failure. Incidence rate of the prespecified combined primary endpoint was 3.6 per 100 person-years among the actively monitored cohort and 4.5 per 100 person-years in the observational controls. Conclusions At 3 years, screening for AF was associated with a lower rate of clinical events and improved outcomes relative to a matched cohort, although the influence of earlier diagnosis of AF via screening on this finding is unclear. These observational data, including the high event rate surrounding a new clinical diagnosis of AF, support the need for randomized trials to determine whether screening for AF will yield a meaningful protection from strokes and other clinical events. Trail registration The mHealth Screening To Prevent Strokes (mSToPS) Trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov with the identifier NCT02506244.