MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2337950043 · doi:10.1186/s13643-016-0233-5

The effect of tailored Web-based interventions on pain in adults: a systematic review protocol

2016· review· en· W2337950043 on OpenAlexafffund
Géraldine Martorella, Céline Gélinas, Mélanie Berube, Mădălina Boitor, Suzanne Fredericks, S Lemay

Bibliographic record

VenueSystematic Reviews · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversité de MontréalJewish General HospitalToronto Metropolitan UniversityMcGill UniversityQuebec Network for Research on Aging
FundersRéseau de recherche portant sur les interventions en sciences infirmières du QuébecFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéFlorida State University
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionCINAHLPsycINFOMEDLINERandomized controlled trialCochrane LibrarySystematic reviewPhysical therapyIntervention (counseling)Nursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Information technologies can facilitate the implementation of health interventions, especially in the case of widespread conditions such as pain. Tailored Web-based interventions have been recognized for health behavior change among diverse populations. However, none of the systematic reviews looking at Web-based interventions for pain management has specifically addressed the contribution of tailoring. METHODS: The aims of this systematic review are to assess the effect of tailored Web-based pain management interventions on pain intensity and physical and psychological functions. Randomized controlled trials including adults suffering from any type of pain and involving Web-based interventions for pain management, using at least one of the three tailoring strategies (personalization, feedback, or adaptation), will be considered. The following types of comparisons will be carried out: tailored Web-based intervention with (1) usual care (passive control group), (2) face-to-face intervention, and (3) standardized Web-based intervention. The primary outcome will be pain intensity measured using a self-report measure such as the numeric rating scale (e.g., 0-10) or visual analog scale (e.g., 0-100). Secondary outcomes will include pain interference with activities and psychological well-being. A systematic review of English and French articles using MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library will be conducted from January 2000 to December 2015. Eligibility assessment will be performed independently in an unblinded standardized manner by two reviewers. Extracted data will include the following: sample size, demographics, dropout rate, number and type of study groups, type of pain, inclusion and exclusion criteria, study setting, type of Web-based intervention, tailoring strategy, comparator, type of pain intensity measure, pain-related disability and psychological well-being outcomes, and times of measurement. Disagreements between reviewers at the full-text level will be resolved by consulting a third reviewer, a senior researcher. DISCUSSION: This systematic review is the first one looking at the specific ingredients and effects of tailored and Web-based interventions for pain management. Results of this systematic review could contribute to a better understanding of the mechanisms by which Web-based interventions could be helpful for people facing pain problems. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42015027669.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.206
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.007
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.007

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.403 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystematic ReviewsSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207