MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888984599 · doi:10.2196/11740

First 28: Design of a Mobile App for Neonatal Health Risk Assessment and Support for New Mothers

2018· article· en· W2888984599 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andy V. Pham, Elsie F Bluett, Priyanka Puthran, Sayantani Sarkar, Katherine Kim, Prabhu Shankar

Bibliographic record

VenueIproceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingPsychological interventionMedicineInfant mortalityHealth careNursingResource (disambiguation)Environmental healthFamily medicinePediatricsEconomic growthPopulationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Factors like dehydration and respiratory infection pose risks to infant survival in the critical first 28 days of life. UNICEF reported the 2016 global rate of neonatal death was 19 per 1000 live births. Typically, women manage multiple household and family responsibilities in addition to care of a new baby and often feel overwhelmed by the demands of new motherhood. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends that support to new mothers be an ongoing process, rather than a single postnatal visit. However, in low-resource environments such as developing countries and remote communities, access to ongoing support for breastfeeding, health education, and infant check-ups from a professional health care provider or health worker may not be possible. Numerous examples exist of successful mobile health interventions in low-resource environments. However, existing mobile apps for newborn health often focus on single issues that are disconnected from health care providers. There is a need to comprehensively address multiple newborn health issues, with evidence-based and personalized interventions that support new mothers. Objective: This study aims to design and build a prototype of a mobile app to comprehensively identify early signs and symptoms of common newborn illnesses, access relevant evidence-based health information, and support decision-making with the overall goal of enhancing new mothers’ ability to improve newborn health outcomes. The prototype will be used in a future pragmatic trial. Methods: An interdisciplinary and international team including nursing, medicine, dietary, health informatics, and public health collaborated on this study. First, a literature review was conducted to supplement the team’s existing knowledge on common neonatal problems, generate the evidence base for appropriate in-home interventions, and identify best practices in breast feeding. Second, a review of current mobile apps available in neonatal risks was conducted to assess gaps with attention to comprehensiveness of health issues, interface/integration with clinical decision support systems, and application of user-centered design and state of the art design principles and standards. Results: Our app, First 28, works offline for easy accessibility and displays evidence-based best practices and guidelines, personalized for mothers based on risks. Using a tailored symptoms list and computerized data entry to gather information, the mobile app performs analysis using a decision table algorithm to identify the risks the baby might encounter and suggests best solutions based on the outcomes. Mothers can submit images or crucial information about their baby and track growth through the app’s data visualization tools. Data is stored on a FHIR server for integration with health care services and electronic health records. Future plans include automated data and image analytics of the uploaded information to alert health care providers of any abnormalities that may provide critical early evidence for potential neonatal risks and complications. Conclusions: First 28 empowers mothers with the knowledge and resources to maintain proper breastfeeding techniques, assess newborn health risks, and improve health outcomes within the crucial first 28 days of life. In the next phase, the prototype will be evaluated by users with a plan to utilize it in a pragmatic trial.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.383
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.381 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIproceedingsSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207