FLIRT: A Feature Generation Toolkit for Wearable Data

Background and Objective: Researchers use wearable sensing data and machine learning (ML) models to predict various health and behavioral outcomes. However, sensor data from commercial wearables are prone to noise, missing, or artifacts. Even with the recent interest in deploying commercial wearables for long-term studies, there does not exist a standardized way to process the raw sensor data and researchers often use highly specific functions to preprocess, clean, normalize, and compute features. This leads to a lack of uniformity and reproducibility across different studies, making it difficult to compare results. To overcome these issues, we present FLIRT: A Feature Generation Toolkit for Wearable Data; it is an open-source Python package that focuses on processing physiological data specifically from commercial wearables with all its challenges from data cleaning to feature extraction. Methods: FLIRT leverages a variety of state-of-the-art algorithms (e.g., particle filters, ML-based artifact detection) to ensure a robust preprocessing of physiological data from wearables. In a subsequent step, FLIRT utilizes a sliding-window approach and calculates a feature vector of more than 100 dimensions – a basis for a wide variety of ML algorithms. Results: We evaluated FLIRT on the publicly available WESAD dataset, which focuses on stress detection with an Empatica E4 wearable. Preprocessing the data with FLIRT ensures that unintended noise and artifacts are appropriately filtered. In the classification task, FLIRT outperforms the preprocessing baseline of the original WESAD paper. Conclusion: FLIRT provides functionalities beyond existing packages that can address unmet needs in physiological data processing and feature generation: (a) integrated handling of common wearable file formats (e.g., Empatica E4 archives), (b) robust preprocessing, and (c) standardized feature generation that ensures reproducibility of results. Nevertheless, while FLIRT comes with a default configuration to accommodate most situations, it offers a highly configurable interface for all of its implemented algorithms to account for specific needs.ISSN:0169-2607ISSN:1872-756

Consensus and diversity in the management of varicocele for male infertility: Results of a global practice survey and comparison with guidelines and recommendations

Purpose: Varicocele is a common problem among infertile men. Varicocele repair (VR) is frequently performed to improve semen parameters and the chances of pregnancy. However, there is a lack of consensus about the diagnosis, indications for VR and its outcomes. The aim of this study was to explore global practice patterns on the management of varicocele in the context of male infertility. Materials and Methods: Sixty practicing urologists/andrologists from 23 countries contributed 382 multiple-choice-questions pertaining to varicocele management. These were condensed into an online questionnaire that was forwarded to clinicians involved in male infertility management through direct invitation. The results were analyzed for disagreement and agreement in practice patterns and, compared with the latest guidelines of international professional societies (American Urological Association [AUA], American Society for Reproductive Medicine [ASRM], and European Association of Urology [EAU]), and with evidence emerging from recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Additionally, an expert opinion on each topic was provided based on the consensus of 16 experts in the field. Results: The questionnaire was answered by 574 clinicians from 59 countries. The majority of respondents were urologists/uro-andrologists. A wide diversity of opinion was seen in every aspect of varicocele diagnosis, indications for repair, choice of technique, management of sub-clinical varicocele and the role of VR in azoospermia. A significant proportion of the responses were at odds with the recommendations of AUA, ASRM, and EAU. A large number of clinical situations were identified where no guidelines are available. Conclusions: This study is the largest global survey performed to date on the clinical management of varicocele for male infertility. It demonstrates: 1) a wide disagreement in the approach to varicocele management, 2) large gaps in the clinical practice guidelines from professional societies, and 3) the need for further studies on several aspects of varicocele management in infertile men

Empagliflozin in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease

Background The effects of empagliflozin in patients with chronic kidney disease who are at risk for disease progression are not well understood. The EMPA-KIDNEY trial was designed to assess the effects of treatment with empagliflozin in a broad range of such patients. Methods We enrolled patients with chronic kidney disease who had an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of at least 20 but less than 45 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) of body-surface area, or who had an eGFR of at least 45 but less than 90 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) with a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (with albumin measured in milligrams and creatinine measured in grams) of at least 200. Patients were randomly assigned to receive empagliflozin (10 mg once daily) or matching placebo. The primary outcome was a composite of progression of kidney disease (defined as end-stage kidney disease, a sustained decrease in eGFR to < 10 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2), a sustained decrease in eGFR of & GE;40% from baseline, or death from renal causes) or death from cardiovascular causes. Results A total of 6609 patients underwent randomization. During a median of 2.0 years of follow-up, progression of kidney disease or death from cardiovascular causes occurred in 432 of 3304 patients (13.1%) in the empagliflozin group and in 558 of 3305 patients (16.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.82; P < 0.001). Results were consistent among patients with or without diabetes and across subgroups defined according to eGFR ranges. The rate of hospitalization from any cause was lower in the empagliflozin group than in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.95; P=0.003), but there were no significant between-group differences with respect to the composite outcome of hospitalization for heart failure or death from cardiovascular causes (which occurred in 4.0% in the empagliflozin group and 4.6% in the placebo group) or death from any cause (in 4.5% and 5.1%, respectively). The rates of serious adverse events were similar in the two groups. Conclusions Among a wide range of patients with chronic kidney disease who were at risk for disease progression, empagliflozin therapy led to a lower risk of progression of kidney disease or death from cardiovascular causes than placebo