Implementation and Effectiveness of the Power Over Pain Portal for Patients Awaiting a Tertiary Care Consultation for Chronic Pain: Protocol for a Pilot, Prospective, Cohort, Mixed Methods Study (Preprint)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND Chronic pain (CP) affects approximately 8 million people in Canada. Access to CP care is challenging, and there is no robust monitoring system to support patient care and decision-making. The Power Over Pain (POP) Portal was developed by people living with CP, health care providers, researchers, health system decision-makers, policymakers, and community partners to address these concerns. The POP Portal is a comprehensive web-based platform that provides rapid access to a continuum of free, evidence-informed resources for the self-management of CP, mental health, and substance use health. The POP Portal also offers self-assessment tools that enable users to track their progress and receive personalized recommendations. OBJECTIVE This hybrid implementation-effectiveness type III pilot study aimed to determine the feasibility (ie, recruitment, integration, facilitators and barriers, patient engagement, usability, and acceptability) of the POP Portal’s implementation for people waiting for care at a tertiary pain clinic. METHODS A cohort of 80 adults living with pain was recruited from the waitlist of a tertiary care pain clinic over a 3-month period. Following an orientation on the POP Portal, participants were encouraged to use it according to their needs and preferences. They were also asked to complete questionnaires at baseline (0 months) and the 3-month follow-up. Primary feasibility measures included recruitment and retention rates and portal acceptability using the Acceptability E-scale. We also measured usability using the System Usability Scale, evaluated engagement through portal analytics, and identified facilitators and barriers via semistructured interviews with 12 to 15 study participants. These interviews further assessed the acceptability and usability of the portal for participants. Exploratory measures included pain severity, pain-related interference, self-efficacy, coping strategies, and symptoms of anxiety and depression. RESULTS We will present descriptive data on the cohort’s sex and gender, age, rural or urban status, and ethnic background, as well as the acceptability, usability, and feasibility of the portal. Measures of central tendency will be reported for continuous variables, and frequencies and proportions will be reported for categorical variables. We will also present change in clinical outcomes across time and a synthesis of qualitative and thematic data. CONCLUSIONS We anticipate that most patients awaiting care at a tertiary pain clinic recruited will use the POP Portal and find it to be acceptable for addressing some of their pain and associated health concerns. If the feasibility of recruiting and retaining patients is demonstrated as anticipated, we will be able to move forward with a multisite study to evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of the POP Portal among patients waiting for a tertiary care consultation. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT DERR1-10.2196/64801
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 | 0,050 | 0,039 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,007 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,036 | 0,006 |
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 ».