MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912523228 · doi:10.1161/circ.133.suppl_1.p075

Abstract P075: Oncologists’ Perceptions of the Usability of SPHERE: an Electronic Health Record Application Based on Life’s Simple 7™

2016· article· en· W2912523228 on OpenAlexaff
Randi E. Foraker, Marjorie M. Kelley, Wilkister Tangasi, En‐Ju D. Lin, Kathryn E. Weaver

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: We developed SPHERE, an electronic health record (EHR) data visualization application, to automatically populate with EHR data on the American Heart Association’s cardiovascular health (CVH) behaviors and factors. SPHERE was designed to increase patient-provider communication around Life’s Simple 7™, and utilized a stoplight color scheme as part of the visualization to indicate “ideal” (green), “intermediate” (yellow), and “poor” (red) CVH. Results from the SPHERE Study showed improvements in body mass index and diabetes status among eligible patients seen in the intervention clinic as compared to the control clinic. It remains unknown whether the use of SPHERE would be acceptable to oncologists in the survivorship care setting, even though cancer survivors are at high risk for developing cardiovascular disease. Methods: We conducted one-on-one interviews, using a think-aloud protocol, with 14 oncologists (10 community practice, 4 academic) who were practicing in the NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP). During the 30-minute interview period, we asked each oncologist to use SPHERE and we obtained user feedback on the SPHERE application. Results: Half of the oncologists were male, and most (78%) were medical oncologists; 2 were gynecologic oncologists, and 1 was a radiation oncologist. When asked about discussing CVH with post-treatment, good-prognosis patients, no oncologists indicated that they “never” talked to patients about CVH or initiated those discussions. Eleven oncologists responded that discussing CVH was either “somewhat important” or “very important”, and 9 oncologists indicated they were “somewhat comfortable” or “very comfortable” discussing CVH with patients. Themes identified from transcripts of the 7 hours of interviews suggest 1) strong interest in the tool, 2) high perceived importance of discussing CVH with patients who had a good prognosis, 3) high usability, and 4) a belief that the tool would be helpful and not overly burdensome in practice. Duplication of preventative health efforts with the primary care provider as well as workflow and time constraints were identified as barriers by several oncology providers. Conclusions: Overall, these preliminary data demonstrate acceptability and feasibility of implementing the SPHERE application tool within NCORP community oncology practices. These qualitative data suggest great potential for automated EHR-based applications such as SPHERE to impact the CVH of cancer patients in survivorship care.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.198

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.297 · 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.

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicCardiovascular Health and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207