MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2895843559

Feasibility Testing of An Internet-Based Psycho-Educational Game for Children with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis and Their Parents

2017· article· en· W2895843559 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jennifer Stinson, Mark Connelly, Adam M. Huber, Nadia Luca, Lynn Spiegel, Argerie Tsimicalis, Stephanie Luca, Naweed Tajuddin, Roberta Berard, Julie Barsalou, Sarah Campillo, Brian M. Feldman, Shirley M. L. Tse, Paul Dancey, Ciarán M. Duffy, Nicole Johnson, Patrick B. McGrath, Natalie J. Shiff, Lori B. Tucker, J. Charles Victor

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJuvenileArthritisThe InternetMedicinePsychologyPhysical therapyComputer scienceInternal medicineBiologyWorld Wide WebGenetics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background/Purpose:\nJuvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) is a common chronic illness in childhood. The responsibility of JIA management during the younger years is shared among family members. However, many families do not receive comprehensive JIA education and coping skills training, which can negatively impact health-related quality of life (HRQL). Evidence supports psycho-educational treatments to improve health outcomes in children with JIA but no program has been developed to meet the needs of 7 to 12-year-old children. The aim of this research is to evaluate the feasibility of a bilingual (English and French) interactive, Internet-based psycho-educational game for children with JIA.\nMethods:\nA pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) design with a usual care control group is underway (target n = 120). Recruitment is ongoing at four Canadian pediatric tertiary care centres and three additional centres will start upon completion of study setup. After informed consent is obtained and baseline questionnaires are completed, participants are randomized. Over the 8-week study period, participants in the experimental group are asked to download the game onto a personal device (i.e., computer or iPad) and interact with the game daily. Participants in the control group receive usual care and are offered the program after post-study. Parents of participants in both groups receive access to the ‘JIA Resource Centre’. Post-study questionnaires are completed following 8-weeks. Implementation outcomes are analyzed using descriptive statistics.\nResults:\nTo date, 57 participant dyads have enrolled in the study. Of these, 30 have completed the study, 24 are currently in progress, and 3 have dropped out. Reasons for dropping out included, failure to download the game due to technical difficulties (1 dyad) or lack of time (2 dyads). On average, dyads have taken 7.8 (SD = 6.5) days to download the game. Additional directions or prompts for families to download the game was required from the team for 61.3% (n = 19) of intervention participants and of these, the team contacted dyads an average of 5.4 (SD = 3.6) times before the download was successful. For 22.6% (n = 7), a change of device type was required for a successful download. On average, participants have gotten through 31.2% of game content at the end of 8-weeks. Participants were contacted at the 2-week mark (40.9%) and 5-week mark (78.9%) during the study period to follow-up on the lower than expected progress in the game. The response to the intervention has been mostly positive, however, some participants indicated that the level of difficulty was either “too easy” or “too hard” and some considered it too repetitive. Participants appreciated that a game had been developed for their disease population.\nConclusion:\nThe feasibility of this intervention would benefit from an easier distribution procedure as well as compatibility of the game across more platforms (i.e., older iPad versions). The level of difficulty could be better suited if tailored to the child’s age. Next steps include development of a tutorial to assist younger participants. Upon completion of data collection, preliminary effectiveness outcomes will be analyzed.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: Non-randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.220
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)→Same topicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare→French-language works237,207→