MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010400771 · doi:10.25300/misq/2020/15108

IT-Enabled Self-Monitoring for Chronic Disease Self-Management: An Interdisciplinary Review

2020· article· en· W3010400771 on OpenAlexaff
Jinglu Jiang, Ann‐Frances Cameron

Bibliographic record

VenueMIS Quarterly · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWearable computerWearable technologyChronic diseaseComputer scienceDisease monitoringDiseaseMedicineRisk analysis (engineering)EngineeringKnowledge managementEmbedded systemIntensive care medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Self-monitoring is a strategy that patients use to manage their chronic disease and chronic disease risk factors. Technological advances such as mobile apps, web-based tracking programs, sensing devices, wearable technologies, and insideable devices enable IT-based self-monitoring (ITSM) for chronic disease management. Since ITSM is multidisciplinary in nature and our understanding is fragmented, a systematic examination of the literature is performed to build a holistic understanding of the phenomenon. We review 159 studies published in 108 journals and conferences between 2006 and 2017. By adapting affordance actualization theory, we develop an overarching framework to organize the existing literature on ITSM for chronic disease management. Four themes emerge: key ITSM functionalities that enable affordances; effects on ITSM system use; effects on the achievement of chronic care goals; and the role of intermediary outcomes. For each theme, we identify what is known, what is unknown, and opportunities for future research. We also discuss cross-theme opportunities for future research where more diverse theoretical perspectives can contribute to our understanding of the phenomenon. This work provides research directions for IS researchers studying ITSM for chronic disease self-management.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.542
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.396 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations108
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMIS QuarterlySame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207