Animated Patient's guide to Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Assessing patient understanding, shared decision-making, and health outcomes.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patient education resources that address barriers to health literacy, elucidate the many complexities of AML, and demonstrate improved patient outcomes are limited. Poor health literacy is well-recognized as a major impediment in patient understanding of disease, and is an obstacle to patient self-management, shared decision-making, and achievement of optimal health outcomes. The challenges to overcoming barriers of limited health literacy are immense – the AMA cites a mere 12% of Americans are considered health literacy proficient; yet most learning resources for patients utilize a text-based information format, often beyond the comprehension of most patients. To mitigate the barriers of poor understanding and inadequate health literacy, the MDS Foundation developed a highly visual format of learning for patients, using animations, and image-rich educational communication tools. We provide a synopsis of the impact, utility, and benefits of “An Animated Patient's Guide to AML for Best Health Outcomes (APG-AML)” accessible at . Our study's retrospective evaluation demonstrates the value of this format of learning, by assessing knowledge gains, improved self-management skills, as well as enabling discussions between patients and providers to validate the merits and outcomes benefits of the APG-AML website and YouTube resources. Methods: Our APG-AML study reports on data collected from November 2019 to June 2025 (~67 months). We monitored audience outreach, demographics, learner identity (patient/family member/caregiver), knowledge improvement, learner-reported commitment to change, and patients who planned to implement self-management actions into their AML management. Our data comprised information collected on unique visitors, country origins, areas of interest; we measured responses by learners who self-reported intention to discuss new management options with their providers. We also monitored usage of learning resources, such as top views by multimedia type (animations, slide shows, expert videos, patient videos, infographics). We assessed learner impact and commitment to change through surveys, which assessed areas of interest, intention to self-modify behaviors, and intention to discuss disease management opportunities with providers. We followed an adapted approach of Moore's outcomes performance criteria utilized in continuing medical education among the user audiences to assess effectiveness, and learner responses. Results: Our data reports on learner activities based on 565,131 total views globally. There were 319,173 global unique visitors; of which 159,587 (~50%) were unique visitors from the USA. Of US visitors, 47% (n=75,006) identified as AML patients; 24% (n=38,301) identified as family or caregivers; 13% (n=20,746) identified as ‘other’; and 16% (n=25,534) identified as healthcare providers. Of patients who reported actions related to commitment to change, 93% (n=670) reported they “will use information learned to better self-manage their AML”; 94% (n=597) reported they “plan to discuss information learned with their doctor”; 98% (n=737) reported they “plan to discuss AML medication and treatment options with their doctor”. In terms of knowledge improvement among213 respondents, 93% (n=198)indicated “improved understanding of AML”; 91% reported “better understanding of AML diagnosis”; and 94% (n=200)reported they “learned new treatment option information for AML”.Conclusion: Our AML patient education study provides insights into the learning needs, areas of importance and self-reported knowledge gains among learners and suggests that such learning resources can inform patients effectively and facilitate actionable behaviors leading to improved outcomes. Moreover, visual formats of learning can help overcome health literacy barriers and enable greater patient participation in achieving shared-decisions and optimal outcomes.
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 | 0,003 | 0,017 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 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 ».