A Telehealth-Delivered Pulmonary Rehabilitation Intervention in Underserved Hispanic and African American Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Community-Based Participatory Research Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although home telemonitoring (TM) is a promising approach for patients managing their chronic disease, rehabilitation using home TM has not been tested for use with individuals living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) residing in underserved communities. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze qualitative data from focus groups with key stakeholders to ensure the acceptability and usability of the TM COPD intervention. METHODS: We utilized a community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach to adapt a home TM COPD intervention to facilitate acceptability and feasibility in low-income African American and Hispanic patients. The study engaged community stakeholders in the process of modifying the intervention in the context of 2 community advisory board meetings. Discussions were audio recorded and professionally transcribed and lasted approximately 2 hours each. Structural coding was used to mark responses to topical questions in interview guides. RESULTS: We describe herein the formative process of a CBPR study aimed at optimizing telehealth utilization among African American and Latino patients with COPD from underserved communities. A total of 5 major themes emerged from qualitative analyses of community discussions: equipment changes, recruitment process, study logistics, self-efficacy, and access. The identification of themes was instrumental in understanding the concerns of patients and other stakeholders in adapting the pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) home intervention for acceptability for patients with COPD from underserved communities. CONCLUSIONS: These findings identify important adaptation recommendations from the stakeholder perspective that should be considered when implementing in-home PR via TM for underserved COPD patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03007485; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03007485.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.032 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".