Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Assistive Technology for Executive Function Support for People With Acquired Brain Injury: Protocol for Single-Case Experimental Designs
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Executive function, including prospective memory, initiating, planning, and sequencing everyday activities, is frequently affected by acquired brain injury (ABI). Executive dysfunction necessitates the use of compensatory cognitive strategies and, in more severe cases, human support over time. To compensate for the executive dysfunction experienced, growing options for electronic mainstream and assistive technologies may be used by people with ABI and their supporters. OBJECTIVE: We outline the study protocol for a series of single-case experimental designs (SCEDs) to evaluate the effectiveness of smart home, mobile, and/or wearable technologies in reducing executive function difficulties following ABI. METHODS: Up to 10 adults with ABI who experience executive dysfunction and have sufficient cognitive capacity to provide informed consent will be recruited across Victoria and New South Wales, Australia. Other key inclusion criteria are that they have substantial support needs for everyday living and reside in community dwellings. On the basis of the participant's identified goal(s) and target behavior(s), a specific electronic assistive technology will be selected for application. Both identification of the target behavior(s) and selection of the assistive technology will be determined via consultation with each participant (and their key support person, if applicable). The choice of SCED will be individualized for each participant based on the type of technology used in the intervention, the difficulty level of the behavior targeted for change, and the anticipated rate of change. For each SCED, repeated measurements of the target behavior(s) during the baseline condition will provide performance data for comparison with the performance data collected during the intervention condition (with technology introduced). Secondary outcome measures will evaluate the impact of the intervention. The protocol includes 2 customizable Microsoft Excel spreadsheets for electronic record keeping. RESULTS: Recruitment period is June 2022 through March 2024. Trial results for the individual participants will be graphed and analyzed separately using structured visual analysis supplemented with statistical analysis. Analysis will focus on important features of the data, including both within- and between-phase comparisons for response level, trend, variability, immediacy, consistency, and overlap. An exploratory economic evaluation will determine the impact on formal and informal support usage, together with quality of life, following the implementation of the new technological intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The study has been designed to test the cause-effect functional relationships between the intervention-in this case, electronic assistive technology-and its effect in changing the target behavior(s). The evaluation evidence gained will offer new insights into the application of various electronic assistive technologies for people who experience executive dysfunction following ABI. Furthermore, the results will help increase the capacity of key stakeholders to harness the potential of technology to build independence and reduce the cost of care for this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12622000835741, https://www.anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12622000835741.aspx. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/48503.
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 | 0,057 | 0,043 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,006 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,024 | 0,004 |
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 ».