PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - María Goñi
AU  - Simon Eickhoff
AU  - Mehran Sahandi Far
AU  - Kaustubh Patil
AU  - Juergen Dukart
TI  - Limited diagnostic accuracy of smartphone-based digital biomarkers for Parkinson’s disease in a remotely-administered setting
AID  - 10.1101/2021.01.13.21249660
DP  - 2021 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2021.01.13.21249660
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/01/15/2021.01.13.21249660.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/01/15/2021.01.13.21249660.full
AB  - Background Smartphone-based digital biomarker (DB) assessments provide objective measures of daily-life tasks and thus hold the promise to improve diagnosis and monitoring of Parkinson’s disease (PD). To date, little is known about which tasks perform best for these purposes and how different confounds including comorbidities, age and sex affect their accuracy. Here we systematically assess the ability of common self-administered smartphone-based tasks to differentiate PD patients and healthy controls (HC) with and without accounting for the above confounds.Methods Using a large cohort of PD patients and healthy volunteers acquired in the mPower study, we extracted about 700 features commonly reported in previous PD studies for gait, balance, voice and tapping tasks. We perform a series of experiments systematically assessing the effects of age, sex and comorbidities on the accuracy of the above tasks for differentiation of PD patients and HC using several machine learning algorithms.Results When accounting for age, sex and comorbidities, the highest balanced accuracy on hold-out data (67%) was achieved using relevance vector machine on tapping and when combining all tasks. Only moderate accuracies were achieved for other tasks (60% for balance, 56% for gait and 55% for voice data). Not accounting for the confounders consistently yielded higher accuracies of up to 73% (for tapping) for all tasks.Discussion Our results demonstrate the importance of controlling DB data for age and comorbidities. They further point to a moderate power of commonly applied DB tasks to differentiate between PD and HC when conducted in poorly controlled self-administered settings.Competing Interest StatementJD is a former employee and received consultancy fees on another topic from F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG. All authors report no conflicts of interest with respect to the work presented in this study.Funding StatementNo external funding was received.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethical oversight of the m-Power study was obtained from Western Institutional Review Board. Prior to signing an electronically rendered traditional informed consent form, prospective participants had to pass a five-question quiz evaluating their understanding of the study aims, participant rights, and data sharing options. After completing the e-consent process and electronically signing the informed consent form, participants were asked for an email address to which their signed consent form was sent and allowing for verification of their enrollment in the study. Participants were given the option to share their data only with the mPower study team and partners ('share narrowly') or to share their data more broadly with qualified researchers worldwide, and had to make an active choice to complete the consent process (no default choice was presented). The data used in our study consist of all individuals who chose to have their data shared broadly. The access to the data was granted after registration in the Synapse system and accepting data-specific conditions.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe m-Power dataset used for this article is available upon registration from Synapse at: https://www.synapse.org/#!Synapse:syn4993293/