MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3153229544 · doi:10.2196/26442

Feasibility and Acceptability of an Asthma App to Monitor Medication Adherence: Mixed Methods Study

2021· article· en· W3153229544 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cristina Jácome, Rute Almeida, Ana Margarida Pereira, Rita Amaral, Sandra Mendes, Magna Alves‐Correia, Carmen Vidal, Sara Freire, Paula Méndez‐Brea, Luís Araújo, Mariana Couto, Darío Antolín‐Amérigo, Belén de la Hoz Caballer, Alicia Barra Castro, David González‐de‐Olano, Ana Todo‐Bom, João Azevedo, Paula Pinto, Nicole Pinto, Ana Castro Neves, Ana Palhinha, Filipa Todo Bom, Alberto Costa, Cláudia Chaves Loureiro, Lília Maia Santos, Ana Arrobas, Margarida Valério, João Cardoso, Madalena Emiliano, Rita Gerardo, José Carlos Cidrais Rodrigues, Georgeta Oliveira, Joana Carvalho, Ana Mendes, Carlos Lozoya, Natacha Santos, Fernando Menezes, Ricardo Gomes, Rita Câmara, Rodrigo Rodrigues Alves, Ana Sofia Moreira, Diana Bordalo, Carlos Alves, José Alberto Ferreira, Cristina Lopes, Diana Silva, Maria João Vasconcelos, Maria Fernanda Teixeira, Manuel Ferreira‐Magalhães, Luís Taborda‐Barata, Maria José Cálix, Adelaide Alves, João Fonseca

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
KeywordsMedicineAsthmaInhalerObservational studyMedication adherenceAsthma medicationmHealthPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychological interventionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Poor medication adherence is a major challenge in asthma, and objective assessment of inhaler adherence is needed. The InspirerMundi app aims to monitor adherence while providing a positive experience through gamification and social support. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the InspirerMundi app to monitor medication adherence in adolescents and adults with persistent asthma (treated with daily inhaled medication). METHODS: A 1-month mixed method multicenter observational study was conducted in 26 secondary care centers from Portugal and Spain. During an initial face-to-face visit, physicians reported patients' asthma therapeutic plan in a structured questionnaire. During the visits, patients were invited to use the app daily to register their asthma medication intakes. A scheduled intake was considered taken when patients registered the intake (inhaler, blister, or other drug formulation) by using the image-based medication detection tool. At 1 month, patients were interviewed by phone, and app satisfaction was assessed on a 1 (low) to 5 (high) scale. Patients were also asked to point out the most and least preferred app features and make suggestions for future app improvements. RESULTS: A total of 107 patients (median 27 [P25-P75 14-40] years) were invited, 92.5% (99/107) installed the app, and 73.8% (79/107) completed the 1-month interview. Patients interacted with the app a median of 9 (P25-P75 1-24) days. At least one medication was registered in the app by 78% (77/99) of patients. A total of 53% (52/99) of participants registered all prescribed inhalers, and 34% (34/99) registered the complete asthma therapeutic plan. Median medication adherence was 75% (P25-P75 25%-90%) for inhalers and 82% (P25-P75 50%-94%) for other drug formulations. Patients were globally satisfied with the app, with 75% (59/79) scoring ≥4,; adherence monitoring, symptom monitoring, and gamification features being the most highly scored components; and the medication detection tool among the lowest scored. A total of 53% (42/79) of the patients stated that the app had motivated them to improve adherence to inhaled medication and 77% (61/79) would recommend the app to other patients. Patient feedback was reflected in 4 major themes: medication-related features (67/79, 85%), gamification and social network (33/79, 42%), symptom monitoring and physician communication (21/79, 27%), and other aspects (16/79, 20%). CONCLUSIONS: The InspirerMundi app was feasible and acceptable to monitor medication adherence in patients with asthma. Based on patient feedback and to increase the registering of medications, the therapeutic plan registration and medication detection tool were redesigned. Our results highlight the importance of patient participation to produce a patient-centered and engaging mHealth asthma app.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.405 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations40
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealth→Same topicAsthma and respiratory diseases→French-language works237,207→