Parent and Clinician Preferences for an Asthma App to Promote Adolescent Self-Management: A Formative Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Most youth asthma apps are not designed with parent and clinician use in mind, and rarely is the app development process informed by parent or clinician input. Objective: This study was conducted to generate formative data on the use, attitudes, and preferences for asthma mHealth app features among parents and clinicians, the important stakeholders who support adolescents with asthma and promote adolescent self-management skills. Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study from 2013 to 2014 employing a user-centered design philosophy to acquire feedback from a convenience sample of 20 parents and 6 clinicians. Participants were given an iPod Touch and asked to evaluate 10 features on 2 existing asthma apps. Participant experiences using the apps were collected from questionnaires and a thematic analysis of audio-recorded and transcribed (verbatim) interviews using MAXQDA. Descriptive statistics were calculated to characterize the study sample and app feature feedback. Independent samples t tests were performed to compare parent and clinician ratings of app feature usefulness (ratings: 1=not at all useful to 5=very useful). Results: All parents were female (n=20), 45% were black, 20% had an income ≥US $50,000, and 45% had a bachelor’s degree or higher education. The clinician sample included 2 nurses and 4 physicians with a mean practice time of 13 years. Three main themes provided an understanding of how participants perceived their roles and use of asthma app features to support adolescent asthma self-management: monitoring and supervision, education, and communication/information sharing. Parents rated the doctor report feature highest, and clinicians rated the doctor appointment reminder highest of all evaluated app features on usefulness. The peak flow monitoring feature was the lowest ranked feature by both parents and clinicians. Parents reported higher usefulness for the doctor report (t(10)=2.7, P<.02), diary (t(10)=2.7, P<.03), and self-check quiz (t(14)=2.5, P<.02) features than clinicians. Specific participant suggestions for app enhancements (eg, a tutorial showing correct inhaler use, refill reminders, pop-up messages tied to a medication log, evidence-based management steps) were also provided. Conclusions: Parent and clinician evaluations and recommendations can play an important role in the development of an asthma app designed to help support youth asthma management. Two-way asthma care communication between families and clinicians and components involving families and clinicians that support adolescent self-management should be incorporated into adolescent asthma apps.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,036 | 0,080 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».