Patient centered development of a new valved holding chamber (VHC) designed specifically for on-the-go use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Although VHCs have been shown to minimize problems of poor inhalation technique and target pMDI delivery to the lungs, they are often left at home due to their size and appearance. Method: As part of a new development project for a VHC intended primarily for use ‘on the go’, patients were actively involved in all steps of the process. These included a) understanding the patient needs and therefore problems to solve, b) interactive involvement in concept development, c) feedback on functionality and appearance, and d) handling / usability. Results: A survey of 715 asthma and COPD patients (14-77 years) indicated that only 13% always used a VHC with their pMDI. Portability, lack of clinician recommendation, and embarrassment were highlighted as key factors why not used. Collaborative exercises and generative design sessions were conducted with inhaler users. A critical learning was that patients preferred a 2-in-1 spacer and protective case for pMDI to smaller or collapsible spacers carried separate to the pMDI for use on-the-go. Prototypes were developed and handling studies performed to evaluate multiple device form factors. The final prototype was confirmed by patients as being highly desirable and very likely to use while on-the-go. Aerosol testing was also performed to verify acceptable drug delivery. Conclusions: The continuous involvement of patients resulted in a number of key insights that helped guide the design process, resulting in the development of a VHC that patients are much more likely to use while on-the-go.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".