Development of Cognitive and Physical Exercise Systems, Clinical Recordings, Large-Scale Data Analytics, and Virtual Coaching for Heart Failure Patients: Protocol for the BioTechCOACH-ForALL Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Heart failure is a chronic disease affecting patient morbidity and mortality. Current guidelines for heart failure patient treatment are focused on improving their clinical status, functional capacity, and quality of life. However, these guidelines implement numerous instructions including medical treatment adherence, physical activity, and self-care management. The complexity of the therapeutic instructions makes them difficult to follow especially by older adults. OBJECTIVE: The challenge of this project is to (1) measure real-life adherence to a regular physical exercise program and (2) attempt to influence older adult patients with heart failure toward embracing a more physically active self-care lifestyle. METHODS: This research consists of two studies, including a lab experiment and a pragmatic evaluation of technology at patients' homes. The lab experiment aims at exploring in an objective way (measuring neurophysiological responses to stimuli) patient engagement with different characteristics of virtual agents, while the home study is a 3-phase prospective study where the developed technology platform is tested by heart failure patients in their own home environments. Patients undergo evaluation of their physical activity and cognitive status using standard evaluation methods (6-minute walk test, questionnaires) and receive wearable devices to accurately measure everyday life activity levels (home study phases 1-3). During home study phases 2 and 3, exergames (serious games for physical exercise) to provide a physical exercise plan as a joyful activity are delivered to patients' private households and e-coaching techniques are implemented in the final phase (home study phase 3) of the protocol, to influence patient attitudes toward a more healthy and recommended lifestyle. RESULTS: The trial is still ongoing. Recruitment is ongoing, and the project has progressed for some participants through phase 2 of the home study. The sample size for both studies is 28 participants; 10 have already been included in the study, and both baseline clinical and patient-reported outcome data are retrieved. Phases 2 and 3 of the home pilot study are expected to be completed within 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: The main challenge of the project is the change of attitude of older age heart failure patients through an e-coaching system. Given the adoption of a cocreation and living lab approach and the main objective for real-life evaluation, the project is ready to react to any collected feedback, even during the implementation of the research plan. Clinical assessment and objective evaluation are expected to provide all required information for reliable findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03877328; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03877328. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/17714.
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 | 0.022 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.067 | 0.016 |
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".