MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2958668705 · doi:10.2196/13164

An Electronic Health Intervention for Dutch Women With Stress Urinary Incontinence: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study

2019· article· en· W2958668705 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lotte Firet, Doreth Teunissen, C. H. van der Vaart, Willem JJ Assendelft, Kim Notten, Rudolf B Kool, A.L.M. Lagro‐Janssen

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic floor disorders treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrinary incontinenceIntervention (counseling)Protocol (science)MedicinePsychologyClinical psychologyNursingAlternative medicineUrology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a common problem with a great potential influence on quality of life. Although SUI can be treated effectively with pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT), only a minority of women with this complaint seek help. An internet-based electronic health (eHealth) intervention could make care more accessible. The Swedish eHealth intervention Tät-treatment of Stress Urinary Incontinence offers PFMT and has shown to be effective in reducing symptoms in women with SUI. This intervention might be helpful for Dutch women too, but its adoption needs to be studied as the Netherlands differs from Sweden in terms of geographical characteristics and health care organization. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this protocol is to investigate the barriers and facilitators to the adoption of an eHealth intervention for Dutch women with SUI and the effects of this intervention. METHODS: We are conducting an explanatory sequential mixed methods study among 800 Dutch women with SUI who participate in the translated version of Tät-treatment of Stress Urinary Incontinence. This eHealth intervention takes 3 months. A pre-post study is conducted using surveys, which are sent at baseline (T0), 3 weeks after baseline (T1), posttreatment (T2), and 3 months posttreatment (T3). After the intervention, semistructured interviews will be held with 15 to 20 participants. The primary outcomes are barriers and facilitators to using the Tät-treatment of Stress Urinary Incontinence. This will also be analyzed among groups that differ in age and severity of incontinence. A thematic content analysis of the qualitative data will be performed. The secondary outcomes are: (1) effect on symptoms of urinary incontinence, (2) effect on quality of life, and (3) factors that are potentially associated with success. Effects will be analyzed by a mixed model analysis. Logistic regression analysis will be used to study what patient-related factors are associated with success. RESULTS: Enrollment started in July 2018 and will be finished by December 2019. Data analysis will start in March 2020. CONCLUSIONS: An eHealth intervention for Dutch women with SUI is promising because it can make treatment more accessible. The strength of this study is that it explores the possibilities for an internet-based-only treatment for women with SUI by using both quantitative and qualitative research methodologies. The study elaborates on existing results by using a previously tested and effective eHealth program. Insight into the barriers and facilitators to using this program can enhance the implementation of the intervention in the Dutch health care system. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Registry (NTR) NTR6956; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/6570. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/13164.

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)0.044
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.230

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0440.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0630.008

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.604
Teacher spread0.474 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicPelvic floor disorders treatmentsFrench-language works237,207