MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997476661 · doi:10.4018/ijeach.2020010104

Fall Prevention and Management App Prototype for the Elderly and Their Caregivers

2019· article· en· W2997476661 on OpenAlexaff
Eseohen Imoukhome, Lori E. Weeks, Samina Abidi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Extreme Automation and Connectivity in Healthcare · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUsabilityMobile appsFall preventionComputer sciencePoint (geometry)Mobile deviceMultimediaWorld Wide WebHuman–computer interactionHuman factors and ergonomicsMedicinePoison controlMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this article is to develop a validated mobile app prototype to empower the elderly and caregivers to manage falls that provides personalized and actionable educational materials at the point of care and improves the engagement of the elderly and caregiver in adopting validated fall management practices; To determine the usefulness and suitability of a fall management mobile app to the elderly and caregivers. The method used is a knowledge management approach is used to implement the app based on 2 validated models: Patient Health Engagement Model and Rockwood frailty index. A mixed method evaluation including a cognitive walk through is used to collect end-user feedback from the elderly and caregivers, on the usability, usefulness, and suitability of the app. The app was deemed easy to use, informative and understandable. Potential improvement areas include: larger print; less wordy interfaces; better navigation features; data sharing functionalities; and voice readers. These suggestions will be incorporated in the future. The conclusion of this article is that smartphones have vast potential in providing relevant and creditable fall management information to elderly and caregivers.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Extreme Automation and Connectivity in HealthcareSame topicChronic Disease Management StrategiesFrench-language works237,207