MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2975138000 · doi:10.2196/14525

A Pain eHealth Platform for Engaging Obese, Older Adults with Chronic Low Back Pain in Nonpharmacological Pain Treatments: Protocol for a Pilot Feasibility Study

2019· article· en· W2975138000 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amber K Brooks, David P. Miller, Jason Fanning, Erin L Suftin, M. Carrington Reid, Brian J. Wells, Xiaoyan Leng, Robert W. Hurley

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthWake Forest University
KeywordseHealthMedicineLow back painPhysical therapyChronic painIntervention (counseling)Health careBack painMEDLINEAlternative medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Low back pain is a costly healthcare problem and the leading cause of disability among adults in the United States. Primary care providers urgently need effective ways to deliver evidence-based, nonpharmacological therapies for chronic low back pain. Guidelines published by several government and national organizations have recommended nonpharmacological and nonopioid pharmacological therapies for low back pain. OBJECTIVE: The Pain eHealth Platform (PEP) pilot trial aims to test the feasibility of a highly innovative intervention that (1) uses an electronic health record (EHR) query to systematically identify a phenotype of obese, older adults with chronic low back pain who may benefit from Web-based behavioral treatments; (2) delivers highly tailored messages to eligible older adults with chronic low back pain via the patient portal; (3) links affected patients to a Web app that provides education on the efficacy of evidence-based, nonpharmacological, behavioral pain treatments; and (4) directs patients to existing Web-based health treatment tools. METHODS: Using a three-step modified Delphi method, an expert panel of primary care providers will define a low back pain phenotype for an EHR query. Using the defined low back pain phenotype, an EHR query will be created to identify patients who may benefit from the PEP. Up to 15 patients with low back pain will be interviewed to refine the tailored messaging, esthetics, and content of the patient-facing Web app within the PEP. Up to 10 primary care providers will be interviewed to better understand the facilitators and barriers to implementing the PEP, given their clinic workflow. We will assess the feasibility of the PEP in a single-arm pragmatic pilot study in which secure patient portal invitations containing a hyperlink to the PEP Web app are sent to 1000 patients. The primary outcome of the study is usability as measured by the System Usability Scale. RESULTS: Qualitative interviews with primary care providers were completed in April 2019. Qualitative interviews with patients will begin in December 2019. CONCLUSIONS: The PEP will leverage informatics and the patient portal to deliver evidence-based nonpharmacological treatment information to adults with chronic low back pain. Results from this study may help inform the development of Web-based health platforms for other pain and chronic health conditions. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/14525.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0700.014

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 head0.185
GPT teacher head0.539
Teacher spread0.354 · 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation→French-language works237,207→