Self-Management Support Program for Patients With Cardiovascular Diseases: User-Centered Development of the Tailored, Web-Based Program Vascular View
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In addition to medical intervention and counseling, patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) need to manage their disease and its consequences by themselves in daily life. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to describe the development of "Vascular View," a comprehensive, multi-component, tailored, Web-based, self-management support program for patients with CVD, and how this program will be tested in an early randomized controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: The Vascular View program was systematically developed in collaboration with an expert group of 6 patients, and separately with a group of 6 health professionals (medical, nursing, and allied health care professionals), according to the following steps of the intervention mapping (IM) framework: (1) conducting a needs assessment; (2) creating matrices of change objectives; (3) selecting theory-based intervention methods and practical applications; (4) organizing methods and applications into an intervention program; (5) planning the adaption, implementation, and sustainability of the program, and (6) generating an evaluation plan. RESULTS: The needs assessment (Step 1) identified 9 general health problems and 8 determinants (knowledge, awareness, attitude, self-efficacy, subjective norm, intention, risk perception, and habits) of self-managing CVD. By defining performance and change objectives (Step 2), 6 topics were distinguished and incorporated into the courses included in Vascular View (Steps 3 and 4): (1) Coping With CVD and its Consequences; (2) Setting Boundaries in Daily Life; (3) Lifestyle (general and tobacco and harmful alcohol use); (4) Healthy Nutrition; (5) Being Physically Active in a Healthy Way; and (6) Interaction With Health Professionals. These courses were based on behavioral change techniques (BCTs) (eg, self-monitoring of behavior, modeling, re-evaluation of outcomes), which were incorporated in the courses through general written information: quotes from and videos of patients with CVD as role models and personalized feedback, diaries, and exercises. The adoption and implementation plan (Step 5) was set up in collaboration with the members of the two expert groups and consisted of a written and digital instruction manual, a flyer, bimonthly newsletters, and reminders by email and telephone to (re-)visit the program. The potential effectiveness of Vascular View will be evaluated (Step 6) in an early RCT to gain insight into relevant outcome variables and related effect sizes, and a process evaluation to identify intervention fidelity, potential working mechanisms, user statistics, and/or satisfaction. CONCLUSION: A comprehensive, multi-component, tailored, Web-based, self-management support program and an early RCT were developed in order to empower patients to self-manage their CVD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Nederlands Trial Register NTR5412; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=5412 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6jeUFVj40).
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".