My Interventional Drug-Eluting Stent Educational App (MyIDEA): Patient-Centered Design Methodology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patient adherence to medication regimens is critical in most chronic disease treatment plans. This study uses a patient-centered tablet app, "My Interventional Drug-Eluting Stent Educational App (MyIDEA)." This is an educational program designed to improve patient medication adherence. OBJECTIVE: Our goal is to describe the design, methodology, limitations, and results of the MyIDEA tablet app. We created a mobile technology-based patient education app to improve dual antiplatelet therapy adherence in patients who underwent a percutaneous coronary intervention and received a drug-eluting stent. METHODS: Patient advisers were involved in the development process of MyIDEA from the initial wireframe to the final launch of the product. The program was restructured and redesigned based on the patient advisers' suggestions as well as those from multidisciplinary team members. To accommodate those with low health literacy, we modified the language and employed attractive color schemes to improve ease of use. We assumed that the target patient population may have little to no experience with electronic tablets, and therefore, we designed the interface to be as intuitive as possible. RESULTS: The MyIDEA app has been successfully deployed to a low-health-literate elderly patient population in the hospital setting. A total of 6 patients have interacted with MyIDEA for an average of 17.6 minutes/session. CONCLUSIONS: Including patient advisers in the early phases of a mobile patient education development process is critical. A number of changes in text order, language, and color schemes occurred to improve ease of use. The MyIDEA program has been successfully deployed to a low-health-literate elderly patient population. Leveraging patient advisers throughout the development process helps to ensure implementation success.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".