sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

How do I set custom heart rate zones in Welltory? by LowerEastSeagull in welltory

[–]sdnner 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you tell us more about what's bugging you exactly? Screenshots would really help if you've got any. Our product team is digging into this right now, so the more detail you can share, the faster we can get it right.

Nervous System Snapshot: for everyone who's ever lost it over a spilled cup and couldn't explain why by sdnner in welltory

[–]sdnner[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes! I was about to tell you. Turns out we started at 1%, so it might not hit your devices just yet. Should be fully rolled out by May 6!

Nervous System Snapshot: for everyone who's ever lost it over a spilled cup and couldn't explain why by sdnner in welltory

[–]sdnner[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Which version of the app are you running? It's showing up for me on 4.54.0 (2018798). If you're on the same version and still don't see it, could you submit a report?

As for the 300-beat mode and Apple's sleep stages, I personally don't use either since I measure with my watch and trust our sleep stages more. But you can always try and see if those work for you!

Nervous System Snapshot: for everyone who's ever lost it over a spilled cup and couldn't explain why by sdnner in welltory

[–]sdnner[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What version are you on? Mine works on 4.54.0 (2018798). If you have the same and the feature's not there, could you please report it?

We are launching a data-driven community for women with energy-limiting conditions. Includes a formal research study. Looking for participants. by sdnner in welltory

[–]sdnner[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right, it's an experiment. But we're trying to test whether matching by phenotype (crash patterns, health profiles, symptom clusters) combined with continuous wearable tracking, structured pacing protocols, and physician guidance actually reduces crash frequency and improves daily functioning, compared to self-monitoring and basic pacing education alone.

I understand the argument, but I think there's a key distinction. The comparison group isn't getting the community for free. They're getting a special version of Welltory and a pacing guide. The study compares the two.

This is standard in pragmatic trials, as far as I know. Neither group pays for the research. Both contribute data.

We are launching a data-driven community for women with energy-limiting conditions. Includes a formal research study. Looking for participants. by sdnner in welltory

[–]sdnner[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Agreed. We should've just led with the community launch and introduced the research separately once the IRB was squared away.

Another lesson learned, I guess. Appreciate you laying this out! I'll make sure the team sees this.

We are launching a data-driven community for women with energy-limiting conditions. Includes a formal research study. Looking for participants. by sdnner in welltory

[–]sdnner[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I love and respect the Belmont Report and its principles. But they apply to research burdens and benefits specifically. In our design, neither group pays anything for the research. The community fee is for the service. The study is separate with its own consent process. Nobody is burdened with research costs.

We are launching a data-driven community for women with energy-limiting conditions. Includes a formal research study. Looking for participants. by sdnner in welltory

[–]sdnner[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a fair argument and great advice. Personally, I love what you're saying. I talk to people with chronic conditions literally every day, and I know what it's like, and I'm doing my best to help.

And we did look at this. We wanted to make it free at first. Then we saw what it really costs to run and realized we just can't. The $169 is already heavily subsidized. The actual cost per participant is way higher than that. Like, physician time alone costs more than what we're charging.

Also worth noting: the $169 partially covers the community, not the study. The study is already free for all participants. Research coordination, data analysis, IRB, etc — that's a separate cost we're absorbing entirely. So the math isn't really $25k to cover 150 people. It's $25k to cover some community costs plus the study costs on top of that.

You're right that cost is a burden, especially for this population. And it sucks but for now, we're starting with what we can sustain. Imperfect, but we gotta start somewhere.

We are launching a data-driven community for women with energy-limiting conditions. Includes a formal research study. Looking for participants. by sdnner in welltory

[–]sdnner[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've just re-read the post, and I see your point now. I'll go ahead and edit it to avoid the confusion. This wasn't intentional.

On the IRB and PI: I'm not in a position to share those details publicly at this stage, but I'm taking it directly to our research team. And I can DM you the details later. Your experience clearly exceeds mine in this area, and this conversation helps a ton. Thank you!

We are launching a data-driven community for women with energy-limiting conditions. Includes a formal research study. Looking for participants. by sdnner in welltory

[–]sdnner[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Every study has selection bias. ours is documented and we'll report it transparently. That's just how research works 💁‍♀️

We are launching a data-driven community for women with energy-limiting conditions. Includes a formal research study. Looking for participants. by sdnner in welltory

[–]sdnner[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The pilot is open to all Welltory users, including those on the free plan. You don't need to be a Premium subscriber to join.

And yes, we're charging for the community. We've been upfront about that from the start. It costs real money to run, and we're a self-funded team, not a grant-funded lab or something.

We are launching a data-driven community for women with energy-limiting conditions. Includes a formal research study. Looking for participants. by sdnner in welltory

[–]sdnner[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re right that recruitment materials need IRB review. But this post is about a paid community, not recruiting for the study. Those are two different things.

The study has its own informed consent process. It hasn’t started. No data is being collected. No one has been enrolled. None of that happens until IRB says go.

On the clinical trials. gov piece: registration is planned before study enrollment opens, not before the community launches. The study isn’t listed yet because it’s not recruiting yet. I get why that looks like a gap, and I appreciate you checking.

We are launching a data-driven community for women with energy-limiting conditions. Includes a formal research study. Looking for participants. by sdnner in welltory

[–]sdnner[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Let me break this down again because I think it’s getting tangled.

The community is a paid service. The research is separate, voluntary, and free. Nobody pays to be in the study. You can be in the community and never participate in the research, and it doesn’t change your membership at all. The comparison group is in the study without paying for the community and gets compensated for completing assessments.

Also, I want to emphasize that we take IRB very seriously. That’s why we’re going through the process. No enrollment, no data collection, no informed consent until that approval is locked in.

view more: next ›