A Physical Activity Mobile Game for Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Patients: App Design, Development, and Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Physical activity mobile apps may encourage patients with cancer to increase exercise uptake, consequently decreasing cancer-related fatigue. While many fitness apps are currently available for download, most are not suitable for patients with cancer due to the unique barriers these patients face, such as fatigue, pain, and nausea. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to design, develop, and perform alpha testing of a physical activity mobile health game for hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients. The ultimate future goal of this project is to motivate HSCT patients to increase physical activity and provide them with a safe and fun way to exercise. METHODS: A mobile health game called Walking Warrior was designed as a puzzle game where tiles are moved and matched. Walking Warrior interfaces with an open-source step counter and communicates with a central online MySQL database to record game play and walking performance. The game came to fruition after following an iterative process model with several prototypes. Game developers and bone marrow transplant nurses were recruited to perform an expert usability evaluation of the Walking Warrior prototype by completing a heuristic questionnaire and providing qualitative suggestions for improvement. Experts also made qualitative recommendations for improvements on speed, movement of tiles, appearance, and accuracy of the step counter. We recruited 5 additional usability evaluators who searched for and compared 4 open-source step counter programs, then qualitatively compared them for accuracy, robustness, cheat proofing, ease of use, and battery drain issues. Patient recruitment is planned at a later stage in this project. This paper only describes software design, development, and evaluation, rather than behavioral evaluation (ie, impact on physical activity), which is the long-term goal of this project. RESULTS: Internal consistency and the instrument's reliability evaluation results from 1 clinical expert and 4 technical experts were deemed excellent (Cronbach α=.933). A hierarchical cluster analysis of the questionnaire item responses for similarity/dissimilarity among the experts indicated that the two expert groups were not clustered into two separate groups in the dendrogram. This indicates that the item responses were not affected by profession. Factor analyses indicate that responses from the 40-item questionnaire were classified into five primary factors. The associated descriptive statistics for each of these categories were as follows (on a scale of 1 to 5): clarity and ease (median 4; mean 3.7, SD 0.45), appropriateness (median 4; mean 3.7, SD 0.49), game quality (median 3.5; mean 3.3, SD 0.42), motivation to walk (median 3; mean 3.1, SD 0.58), and mental effort (median 3.5; mean 3.1, SD 1.27). CONCLUSIONS: The evaluation from experts and clinicians provided qualitative information to further improve game design and development. Findings from the expert usability evaluation suggest the game's assets of clarity, ease of use, appropriateness, quality, motivation to walk, and mental effort were all favorable. This mobile game could ultimately help patients increase physical activity as an aid to recovery.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".