MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890130304 · doi:10.1145/3240925.3240956

Designing pervasive technology for physical activity self-management in arthritis patients

2018· article· en· W2890130304 on OpenAlexaff
Ankit Gupta, Tim Heng, Chris Shaw, Linda Li, Lynne M. Feehan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActivity trackerRheumatoid arthritisPhysical therapyQuality of life (healthcare)MedicinePhysical activityArthritisOsteoarthritisUbiquitous computingComputer sciencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyAlternative medicineHuman–computer interactionInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arthritis is a chronic condition which impairs mobility and reduces the quality of life. A physically active lifestyle is crucial for the successful management of the disease. Pervasive technology such as activity trackers can make patients more aware of their physical activity (PA), and help clinicians in getting an objective view of their patients' lifestyle. We developed a web application called FitViz which gathers data from an arthritis patient's Fitbit device and allows her clinician to use this data in setting personalized goals for the patient. We conducted a pilot study with 10 knee Osteoarthritis patients and 10 Rheumatoid Arthritis patients to test the feasibility of the application. 11 participants were interviewed to share their experiences after using FitViz for a month. The use of pervasive technology --- Fitbit and FitViz --- increased PA awareness, and helped in realistic goal-setting. Participants expressed different emotions --- including mistrust in technology --- concerning goal achievement. We use these findings to draw design implications for future pervasive technologies for arthritis patients.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207