MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892482052 · doi:10.1200/jgo.18.98000

Factors in Sustained Compliance to a Symptom-Reporting Mobile Application: Implications for Clinical Implementation

2018· article· en· W2892482052 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Warren Bacorro, Stephanie Ann Balid–Attwell, Paolo G. Sogono, Catherine Joy T. Escuadra, Cielito C. Reyes‐Gibby, Jocelyn C. Que, Teresa Sy Ortin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialCompliance (psychology)Competence (human resources)Pain assessmentPain managementInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The Internet-based Computerized Patient Assessment System (iComPAsS), a remote pain- and symptom-reporting application was developed to optimize pain monitoring and management. This subanalysis sought to examine factors influencing compliance, to gauge the sustainability of its effects and to guide further development and implementation as part of usual care. Aim: This analysis sought to examine factors influencing compliance, to gauge the sustainability of its effects and to guide further development and implementation as part of usual care. Methods: Patients ≥ 18 years old, with cancer and moderate-severe pain were randomized to standard pain management with pain diary or iComPAsS. Pain and symptom severity (using Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale) and compliance (to iComPAsS or diary) were evaluated at week 0, 3, 6, 12 and 20. The Treatment Self-regulation Questionnaire (TSRQ), used to assess patient motivation, was administered at week 0, 6, 12 and 20. Pain levels and compliance were compared between the groups using the Student t-test. The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to examine the relationship between compliance and pain control, perceived competence in pain self-care, and relative autonomy index. Results: Out of 100 patients enrolled, 76 were included in the analysis (control; 37; iComPAsS, 39). Baseline pain levels and TSRQ characteristics were similar between the groups. Initial compliance and pain control at week 3 were significantly higher in the iComPAsS group. For the iCompAsS group, compliance directly correlated with uncontrolled pain and intrinsic motivation, and was more sustained compared with the control group. Conclusion: The iComPAsS elicited rapid uptake and sustained compliance through intrinsic motivation. When adopting the iComPAsS for clinical use, patient baseline motivation levels may be assessed using the TSRQ, and depressive symptoms and other barriers to engagement must be identified.

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)0.038
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.183
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.200

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0380.183
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.549
Teacher spread0.394 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Global OncologySame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207