MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792849198 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwy008.073

A72 BUILDING A SMARTPHONE APPLICATION FOR COLONOSCOPY PREPARATION USING A PATIENT-CENTERED APPROACH

2018· article· en· W2792849198 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Issues in Poland
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonoscopyFocus groupFacilitatorAttendanceSession (web analytics)Medical educationMedicineComputer scienceMultimediaPsychologyColorectal cancerWorld Wide WebCancerSocial psychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Smartphones are daily use instruments that can serve as a powerful reminders to help individuals adhere to colonoscopy attendance and bowel preparation instructions. The objective of this qualitative study was to better understand users’ preferences for the content and features of a smartphone application that supports colonoscopy preparation. Individuals aged 18 or over, English- or French-speaking, with recent colonoscopy and without colorectal cancer were invited to participate in one focus group session at the McGill University Health Centre. Participants were asked to discuss the kinds of Mobile health support tools they might use to help them carry out colonoscopy, the informational content needed to follow through with preparing for colonoscopy, and the information format that would make it easy to use the smartphone application. Discussions were 60–90 minutes, conducted by a trained facilitator using a standardized approach, and audiotaped for subsequent analysis. Nine individuals (2 women, 7 men) attended one of two focus groups. Seven themes were derived from the discussions: colonoscopy preparation, reminders & alerts, application features, information and instructions, data to input, ability to communicate with endoscopy staff, videos. Participants in both focus groups understood the benefits of a smartphone application that included: 1) it ensures patients do the right thing at the right time; 2) it eliminates conflicting and/or fear-inducing information; 3) it can be tailored to individuals’ needs and expectations. Focus groups were conducted to ensure that the smartphone application addresses users’ needs and expectations for information to carry out the colonoscopy. Findings are being used to develop a smartphone application that supports patients prepare for and attend colonoscopy. Department of Medicine, McGill University and the Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.626
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.296 · 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