Open-source Web Portal for Managing Self-reported Data and Real-world Data Donation in Diabetes Research: Platform Feasibility Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: People with diabetes and their support networks have developed open-source automated insulin delivery systems to help manage their diabetes therapy, as well as to improve their quality of life and glycemic outcomes. Under the hashtag #WeAreNotWaiting, a wealth of knowledge and real-world data have been generated by users of these systems but have been left largely untapped by research; opportunities for such multimodal studies remain open. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of several aspects of open-source automated insulin delivery systems including challenges related to data management and security across multiple disparate web-based platforms and challenges related to implementing follow-up studies. METHODS: We developed a mixed methods study to collect questionnaire responses and anonymized diabetes data donated by participants-which included adults and children with diabetes and their partners or caregivers recruited through multiple diabetes online communities. We managed both front-end participant interactions and back-end data management with our web portal (called the Gateway). Participant questionnaire data from electronic data capture (REDCap) and personal device data aggregation (Open Humans) platforms were pseudonymously and securely linked and stored within a custom-built database that used both open-source and commercial software. Participants were later given the option to include their health care providers in the study to validate their questionnaire responses; the database architecture was designed specifically with this kind of extensibility in mind. RESULTS: Of 1052 visitors to the study landing page, 930 participated and completed at least one questionnaire. After the implementation of health care professional validation of self-reported clinical outcomes to the study, an additional 164 individuals visited the landing page, with 142 completing at least one questionnaire. Of the optional study elements, 7 participant-health care professional dyads participated in the survey, and 97 participants who completed the survey donated their anonymized medical device data. CONCLUSIONS: The platform was accessible to participants while maintaining compliance with data regulations. The Gateway formalized a system of automated data matching between multiple data sets, which was a major benefit to researchers. Scalability of the platform was demonstrated with the later addition of self-reported data validation. This study demonstrated the feasibility of custom software solutions in addressing complex study designs. The Gateway portal code has been made available open-source and can be leveraged by other research groups.
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 | 0,026 | 0,026 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 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 ».