Participant Study

A practical entry point for longitudinal follow-up.

This page explains the study workflow used for selected participants around sleep, overnight physiology, next-day burden, and repeated daily self-report. It is a governed pilot surface, not an open self-serve sign-up.

Open participant return Open institutional framing Return to overview

What is captured

Passive signals plus daily labels

The study is not built on passive data alone. The important step is linking sleep and overnight physiology to repeated daily self-report.

  • Passive layer. Sleep timing, duration, continuity, heart-rate signal, HRV, activity, daylight, and related wearable measures when available.
  • Daily check-in. Short self-report on sleep quality, stress, anxiety, mood, fatigue, pain or tension, and a few key confounders like caffeine or alcohol.
  • Change events. Intervention starts, context changes, disruptions, or protocol notes can be logged explicitly so the system can compare windows before and after the change.
  • Merge point. The final bundle is joined by participant identity and dates so the project can read night-to-day relationships within the same person.

Why this matters

It closes the main gap left by passive exports alone

Wearable exports are strong for pattern-tracking, but limited for symptoms and next-day burden unless daily labels exist. This study layer is what makes that linkage explicit.

  • Without daily labels. We can describe timing, short nights, or activated nights, but not defend strong symptom claims.
  • With daily labels. We can test within-person links such as short sleep to next-day stress, late nights to worse fatigue, or hyperactivation to a harder following day.
  • For the project. This gives Butterfly Effect its own longitudinal data path instead of depending only on outside cohorts.

Current pilot timeline

The scientific value comes from keeping the dates and labels aligned.

The live pilot should stay simple until the wearable export is available. The important asset is not one impressive dashboard now; it is a clean longitudinal table that can later be fused with wearable-derived nights without ambiguity.

  • Collection window. Daily check-ins continue during the follow-up window so symptoms, sleep quality, stress, fatigue, pain, and context are captured repeatedly.
  • Wearable merge. After export, sleep and physiology are joined by participant code and date before any interpretation is generated.
  • First strong readout. The first serious output should be a within-person pattern review with data quality, missingness, and claim limits visible on the page.

Participant contract

The study is narrow on purpose.

  • Not diagnostic. The study does not diagnose insomnia, anxiety, depression, pain conditions, or any other disorder.
  • Longitudinal first. The unit of interpretation is repeated pattern, not one isolated night.
  • Research return. Outputs are designed to be understandable, but they remain governed research return rather than a consumer sleep app.

What participants receive

A serious return, not a wellness score.

  • Participant-facing monthly review. Clear explanation of the dominant sleep and physiology patterns in the follow-up window, with explicit limits.
  • Professional companion. Same core payload, but more structured for psychologist, clinician, or research review.
  • Response-to-change layer. When meaningful events are logged, the project can describe whether the signal moved in the expected direction, stayed mixed, or remains too weak to read clearly.
  • Evidence-backed orientation. Where relevant, the system can attach guidance tiers based on stronger vs weaker evidence rather than generic tips.

Operational tools

How access is handled right now

  • Invitation-only participant access. The secure participant check-in is opened only for invited participants with a provisioned study account and linked participant code. It is not a public self-serve sign-up surface.
  • Participant experience stays focused. Export and support tools are kept out of the participant view so the daily task stays short, clear, and repeatable.
  • Study operations stay separate. Research setup, CSV contracts, local recovery utilities, and later wearable merge remain outside the participant-facing panel.

Privacy and operations

Pseudonymized study handling

  • Participant identity is separated. Contact details and analytical data should not live in the same operational layer.
  • Study data is linked by participant code. Daily check-ins, wearable exports, and generated reports all bind to the same governed participant identifier.
  • Scope remains academic and developmental. This infrastructure supports research, pilot studies, and methodological validation; it is not yet a clinical product.