1. Start with a baseline, not a verdict
The most common mistake in fatigue tracking is trying to explain a trend too early. A few bad days can feel meaningful, but they are often just noise or incomplete coverage.
For most desk-work routines, a 7-day baseline is the minimum useful window. If you want to compare fatigue with active minutes or working sessions, 30 days is usually better.
2. Recorded minutes vs reliable minutes
Sarenica distinguishes total recorded minutes from reliable minutes. This matters because low-quality sensor conditions can produce data that is recorded but not trustworthy enough for stronger claims.
- Use recorded minutes to understand coverage volume.
- Use reliable minutes to judge whether comparison/correlation analysis is meaningful.
- If reliable minutes are low, ask for a coverage summary before asking for causal explanations.
3. Ask time-window-first questions
Broad fatigue questions often trigger clarification because the system needs a time scope. You'll get better results faster if you specify the window upfront.
Broad fatigue questions often trigger clarification because the system needs a time scope. You’ll get better results faster if you specify the window upfront.
Good examples
- "Compare my fatigue and active minutes over the last 30 days."
- "What fatigue pattern repeats most in my last 2 weeks of work sessions?"
- "Summarize fatigue trends this month and highlight low-confidence areas."
4. Focus on repeatability before interpretation
Once you have enough coverage, look for repeated conditions: similar session lengths, weekdays, or time blocks. This gives you a stronger foundation than one-off observations.
If you are experimenting (sleep schedule, breaks, caffeine timing), label those changes. Labels help transform general fatigue tracking into more reliable pattern analysis.