A Systematic Review of Internet-based Self-Management Interventions for Youth with Health Conditions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Critically appraise research evidence on effectiveness of internet self-management interventions on health outcomes in youth with health conditions. METHODS: Published studies of internet interventions in youth with health conditions were evaluated. Electronic searches were conducted in EBM Reviews-Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsychINFO. Two reviewers independently selected articles for review and assessed methodological quality. Of 29 published articles on internet interventions; only nine met the inclusion criteria and were included in analysis. RESULTS: While outcomes varied greatly between studies, symptoms improved in internet interventions compared to control conditions in seven of nine studies. There was conflicting evidence regarding disease-specific knowledge and quality of life, and evidence was limited regarding decreases in health care utilization. CONCLUSIONS: There are the beginnings of an evidence base that self-management interventions delivered via the internet improve selected outcomes in certain childhood illnesses.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it