MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995726863 · doi:10.2196/16926

Cancer Patients’ and Survivors’ Perceptions of the Calm App: Cross-Sectional Descriptive Study

2019· article· en· W2995726863 on OpenAlex
Jennifer Huberty, Megan Puzia, Ryan Eckert, Linda Larkey

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Cancer · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeditationCancerCoping (psychology)Survivorship curveCross-sectional studyGerontologyClinical psychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is a need for tools to decrease cancer patients' and survivors' long-term symptom burden. Complementary strategies, such as meditation, can accompany pharmacologic therapy to improve symptoms. Although support programs with targeted content have wider reach, higher adherence, and greater impact, there are no consumer-based meditation apps designed specifically for cancer. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to gather information to advise the development of a cancer-specific meditation app in a small convenience sample of cancer patients and survivors who currently use the Calm app. METHODS: Adult cancer patients and survivors who are Calm users (N=82) were recruited through the Daily Calm Facebook page. Participants completed a Web-based survey related to Calm app use and satisfaction, interest in and ideas for a cancer-specific Calm app, and demographic characteristics. Open-ended responses were inductively coded. RESULTS: Participants were aged between 18 and 72 years (mean 48.60 years, SD 15.20), mostly female (77/82, 94%), white (65/79, 82%), and non-Hispanic (70/75, 93%), and reported using Calm at least 5 times per week (49/82, 60%). Although rates of satisfaction with current Calm components were high (65/82, 79%; and 51/81, 63%), only 49% (40/82) of participants used guided meditations that they felt specifically helped with their cancer-related symptoms and survivorship, and 40% (33/82) would prefer more cancer-related content, with guided meditations for cancer-specific anxieties (eg, fear of recurrence; n=15) and coping with strong emotions (n=12) being the most common suggestions. A majority of participants (51/82, 62%) reported that they would be interested in becoming a member of a Calm cancer community (eg, in-app discussion boards: 41/46, 89%; and social media communities: 35/42, 83%). Almost half of the participants (37/82, 45%) reported that they would benefit from features that tracked symptoms in concurrence with app usage, but respondents were divided on whether this information should be shared with health care providers through the app (49/82, 60% would share). CONCLUSIONS: Responses suggest ways in which the current Calm app could be adapted to better fit cancer patients' and survivors' needs and preferences, including adding more cancer-specific content, increasing the amount of content focusing on coping with strong emotions, developing communities for Calm users who are cancer patients and survivors, and including features that track cancer-related symptoms. Given differences in opinions about which features were desirable or would be useful, there is a clear need for future cancer-specific apps to be customizable (eg, ability to turn different features on or off). Although future research should address these topics in larger, more diverse samples, these data will serve as a starting point for the development of cancer-specific meditation app and provide a framework for evaluating their effects.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.303 · 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