MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3214910639 · doi:10.2196/23641

Technological Proficiencies, Engagement, and Practical Considerations for mHealth Programs at an Urban Safety-Net Hospital Emergency Departments: Data Analysis

2021· article· en· W3214910639 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sean Treacy-Abarca, J. Mercado, Jorge Iruela Serrano, Jennifer M. Reingle González, Michael Menchine, Sanjay Arora, Shinyi Wu, Elizabeth Burner

Notice bibliographique

RevueJMIR Diabetes · 2021
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
Mots-clésmHealthSafety netMobile phoneMedicineRandomized controlled trialIntervention (counseling)Medical emergencyEmergency departmentPatient safetyMobile technologyFamily medicineNursingMedical educationMobile deviceHealth carePsychological interventionComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Safety-net emergency departments often serve as the primary entry point for medical care for low income predominantly minority patient populations. Herein, we sought to provide insight into the feasibility, technological proficiencies, engagement characteristics, and practical considerations for a mHealth intervention at a safety-net emergency department. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to analyze patient technological proficiency to understand the feasibility of and draw practical considerations for mobile phone technology (mHealth) solutions for patients with chronic disease served by safety-net emergency departments. METHODS: levels >8.5% were enrolled. A text message-based mHealth program to improve disease self-management was provided to all patients. Supporters of patients were randomized to receive a mailed copy or mHealth-based curriculum designed to improve diabetes support. Among enrolled patients, we surveyed mobile technological capacity and frequency of use. We performed latent class analysis to identify classes of patients by level of technological proficiency and compared demographic characteristics between the latent classes to identify demographic subgroups that may require more training or tailoring of the mHealth approach. Study engagement between classes was assessed by comparing the mean number of text messages exchanged, loss to follow-up, and early termination. RESULTS: Of 1876 patients who were approached, 44.2% (n=829) of patients had a stable mobile phone and were able to use text messages. Among them 166 met the trial inclusion and enrolled, 90% (149/166) of the cohort were ethnically diverse. Significant variance was found in technology capacity and frequency of use. Our latent class analysis classified 75% (124/166) of patients as highly technologically proficient and 25% (42/166) patients as minimally technologically proficient. Age (P<.001) and level of education (P<.001) were associated with class membership. Highly technologically proficient patients were younger and had higher levels of education (45.74 years old; high school or more: 90%) than minimally technologically proficient patients (53.64 years old; high school or more: 18%). Highly technologically proficient participants exchanged a mean of 40 text messages with the system coordinators compared to a mean of 10 text messages by minimally technologically proficient patients (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study found that nearly half of the patients screened at the safety-net emergency department were equipped for an SMS text message-based mHealth intervention. In the small sample of patients who were enrolled, the majority were classified as highly technologically proficient. These highly proficient patients had greater study engagement. mHealth use in emergency departments may be an opportunity to improve health of ethnically diverse populations by pairing sophisticated chronic disease self-management program with SMS text message-based and traditional in-person interventions to reach patients through the method that is most familiar and comfortable. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1016/j.cct.2019.03.003.

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,735
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,998

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,158
Tête enseignante GPT0,472
Écart entre enseignants0,314 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJMIR DiabetesMême sujetMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsTravaux en français237 207