Experience of Using an App in HIV Patients Older Than 60 Years: Pilot Program
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: New technologies can promote knowledge of HIV infection among patients suffering from this disease. Older patients with HIV infection represent an increasingly large group that could benefit from the use of specific apps. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to observe the acceptability and use of a mobile app on HIV infection in patients at least 60 years old and offer them the possibility of anonymously establishing contact with their peers. METHODS: A series of clinical and psychosocial parameters were studied in 30 HIV-infected patients of over 60 years. The patients must be at least 60 years old, with a follow-up in the outpatient clinic for at least 1 year and without pathologies that limit his or her life expectancy to less than a year. They must know how to read and write. To be part of the group assigned to the app, they had to have their own smartphone and confirm that they were connected to the internet from that device. Overall, 15 of them were randomized to use an app and 15 were in the control group. All tests were repeated after 6 months. RESULTS: The median age of patients was 66.5 years. Among them, 29 patients had an undetectable viral load at baseline. The median number of comorbid diseases was 2. Overall, 11 of them lived with their partners and 19 lived alone. They spent an average of 5 hours a day sitting down, and 56% (17/30) of them referred high physical activity. They scored 4 out of 5 for general quality of life perception. Moreover, 80% (24/30) presented high adherence to their treatment, and the average number of concomitant medications was 5. In the 6-min walking test, they covered a distance of 400 meters, and 3 of them desaturated during the test. The 15 patients made frequent use of the app, with 2407 sessions and an average of 7 min and 56 seconds time of use with a total of 13,143 screen views. During the 6 months of the trial, 3 non-AIDS events took place. There were no significant modifications to body mass index, blood pressure measurements, lipid profile, or immuno-virology information data. There were no differences in the questionnaire scores for perception of quality of life, confessed physical activity, or antiretroviral treatment (ART) and non-ART treatment adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences between studied parameters were not objectified in these patients, possibly because this trial has significant limitations, such as a small sample size and only a brief follow-up period. However, patients did use the app frequently, making this a possible intervention to be proposed in future subsequent studies.
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 | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 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 ».