MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract 15626: Visualizing Self-reported Symptom Status Can Support Self-management for Heart Failure Patients

2020· article· en· W3098401170 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Meghan Reading Turchioe, Lisa Grossman Liu, Annie Myers, Ruth Masterson Creber

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitionHealth literacyPerceptionDemographicsLiteracyCognitive impairmentGerontologyClinical psychologyPhysical therapyPsychiatryHealth carePsychologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Symptom self-management is important in heart failure (HF) but challenging given the high prevalence of associated cognitive impairment. Visualizations may support symptom self-management by improving recognition of meaningful changes in symptoms over time. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether visualizations of self-reported symptom status were associated with recognition of worsening symptoms (risk perception) and intention to act on worsening symptoms (behavioral intention) . Methods: We recruited hospitalized, English-speaking adults with HF from 2 inpatient cardiac units at an urban academic medical center. A professional designer developed 4 visualizations of simulated changes in self-reported symptoms (e.g., fatigue; Figure 1 ) using best practices for displaying health information to adults with cognitive impairment. Using the participants’ favorite visualization of the 4, we evaluated risk perception and behavioral intention using validated scales. We also collected demographics, health literacy, and cognitive status using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Results: Participants (n=40) had an average age of 61.3 years (±12.5) and were 22% female, 52% White, and 38% Latino. More than half (55%) had low health literacy. Most (88%) had mild/moderate cognitive impairment (MoCA score < 26). The favorite visualization (selected by 42%) was the number line. Regarding risk perception, 70% reported it was very/extremely likely their HF was getting worse and 54% reported they were very/extremely worried about their HF getting worse based on the visualization. Regarding behavioral intention, most (82%) were very/extremely likely to act based on the visualization. Conclusion: Visualizations of symptoms over time communicated risk to most patients who in turn reported being more likely to act, and may be an effective tool to support symptom self-management among HF patients with mild/moderate cognitive impairment.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.689

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicCardiovascular Health and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207