MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000226400 · doi:10.2196/resprot.1958

Computer-Assisted School-Based Asthma Management: A Pilot Study

2012· article· en· W2000226400 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Renée J.G. Arnold, Jeanette A. Stingone, Luz Cláudio

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality
KeywordsMcNemar's testAsthmaMedicinePeak flow meterTest (biology)Tracking (education)Family medicineProgram evaluationPublic healthNursingPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The high prevalence of asthma among children continues to be a major public health issue. In particular, low-income African-American and Hispanic children often receive asthma care in the emergency department and lack access to continuity of care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the current study was to test the feasibility of implementing a computerized program for empowering low-income children with asthma to manage their own disease. This pilot program consisted of a guided, personalized, Web-based computer program as the main component of a school-based asthma intervention. METHODS: The Automated Live E-Health Response Tracking System (ALERTS), a computer-assisted, Web-based tracking program, was tested for implementation in a school in East Harlem, New York. The program required children with asthma, assisted by trained researchers, to routinely measure their peak flow meter readings and answer a symptom questionnaire. The program provided individualized feedback on their disease status based on peak flow meter input. The computer program sent reports to the child's physician and the nurse practitioner at the on-site school health center. The children were also encouraged to bring the reports home to their parents. A pre/post study design was employed such that each participant acted as his/her own control. Comparisons of preintervention and postintervention outcomes were calculated using the paired t-test and the McNemar test for dichotomous data. RESULTS: Twenty-four children (6 to 12 years) participated in the program over 2 to 15 months. Improvements in health outcomes showed the greatest significance among the group of participants who were enrolled for 8 months or longer. Statistically significant improvements were seen in the average physical health score of the children (from 65.64 preintervention to 76.28 postintervention, P = .045). There was a significant decrease in the number of participants experiencing wheezing episodes (n = 9 to n = 2, P = .03), and in the average number of wheezing episodes per child (1.86 to 0.43, P = .02). Although not statistically significant, decreases were also seen in the number of children experiencing an asthma attack and in the average number of asthma attacks among participants. There was also a significant decrease in the average number of visits to doctors' offices or clinics (1.23 to 0.38, P = .04). There were no overnight hospitalizations in the two-week period following the end of the pilot program, a nonsignificant reduction from an average of 0.21 per child. CONCLUSION: This individualized, computer-assisted intervention resulted in improvements in some health outcomes among low-income children in an urban, public school-based setting. Consistent peak flow meter self-measurements, management of medication usage, and a computerized approach to symptom tracking resulted in fewer asthma exacerbations and improved overall physical health among this pediatric population with asthma.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: Non-randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.263
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207