MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165585352 · doi:10.2196/22489

Self-Management Apps for People With Epilepsy: Systematic Analysis

2021· article· en· W3165585352 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohsen Zaied Alzamanan, Kheng Seang Lim, Maizatul Akmar Ismail, Norjihan Abdul Ghani

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiti Malaya
KeywordsPreprintMobile appsmHealthInternet privacyEpilepsyComputer sciencePsychologyWorld Wide WebPsychological interventionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patients with epilepsy (PWEs) are motivated to manage and cope with their disorder themselves (ie, self-management [SM] is encouraged). Mobile health (mHealth) apps have multiple features that have a huge potential to improve SM of individuals with chronic disorders such as epilepsy. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to review all freely available apps related to the SM of PWEs and to determine the SM domains covered in these apps. METHODS: We performed a search of apps on Google Play and App Store using the keywords "epilepsy" or "seizures" from May to August 2018. Apps were included if they were free and in English language. We excluded apps with installation-related issues and not related to epilepsy self-management (eSM). RESULTS: A total of 22 eSM apps were identified in our search: 6 of these run only on iOS, 7 only on Android, and 9 run on both operating systems. Of the 11 domains of SM, seizure tracking and seizure response features were covered by most apps (n=22 and n=19, respectively), followed by treatment management (n=17) and medication adherence (n=15). Three apps (Epilepsy Journal, Epilepsy Tool Kit, and EpiDiary) were installed more than 10,000 times, with features focused specifically on a few domains (treatment management, medication adherence, health care communication, and seizure tracking). Two apps (Young Epilepsy and E-Epilepsy Inclusion) covered more than 6 SM domains but both had lower installation rates (5000+ and 100+, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Both Android and iOS mHealth apps are available to improve SM in epilepsy, but the installation rate of most apps remains low. The SM features of these apps were different from one another, making it difficult to recommend a single app that completely fulfills the needs of PWEs. The common features of the apps evaluated included seizure tracking and seizure response. To improve the efficacy and availability of these apps, we propose the following: (1) involve the stakeholders, such as physicians, pharmacists, and PWEs, during the development of mHealth apps; (2) assess the efficacy and acceptance of the apps objectively by performing a usability analysis; and (3) promote the apps so that they benefit more PWEs.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.732
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.380 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
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 uhealthSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207