Why the study?
The study aimed to identify the most significant features in wearable sensor physiological signals representing a biphasic menstrual cycle pattern using circular statistics to empirically determine menstrual phases.
Can physiological signals recorded with a wearable sensor be used to identify menstrual phases and predict next-day signal behavior?
Can physiological signals recorded with a wearable sensor be used to identify menstrual phases and predict next-day signal behavior?
Wearable sensor data analyzed with circular statistics and ARIMA modeling can identify biphasic physiological patterns to determine menstrual phases and predict next-day values.
May enable empirical menstrual-phase detection from wearables; leaves open larger-scale confirmation before any practice change.
This study aims to identify the most significant features in physiological signals representing a biphasic pattern in the menstrual cycle using circular statistics which is an appropriate analytic method for the interpretation of data with a periodic nature. The results can be used empirically to determine menstrual phases. A non-uniform pattern was observed in ovulating subjects, with a significant periodicity (p < 0.05) in mean temperature, heart rate (HR), Inter-beat Interval (IBI), mean tonic component of Electrodermal Activity (EDA), and signal magnitude area (SMA) of the EDA phasic component in the frequency domain. In contrast, non-ovulating cycles displayed a more uniform distribution (p > 0.05). There was a significant difference between ovulating and non-ovulating cycles (p < 0.05) in temperature, IBI, and EDA but not in mean HR. Selected features were used in training an Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) model, using data from at least one cycle of a subject, to predict the behavior of the signal in the last cycle. By iteratively retraining the algorithm on a per-day basis, the mean temperature, HR, IBI and EDA tonic values of the next day were predicted with root mean square error (RMSE) of 0.13 ± 0.07 (C°), 1.31 ± 0.34 (bpm), 0.016 ± 0.005 (s) and 0.17 ± 0.17 ( μ S), respectively.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sides et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: