A Web-Based Social Network Tool (GENIE) for Supporting Self-management Among High Users of the Health Care System: Feasibility and Usability Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Primary care providers are well positioned to foster self-management through linking patients to community-based health and social services (HSSs). This study evaluated a web-based tool-GENIE (Generating Engagement in Network Involvement)-to support the self-management of adults. GENIE empowers patients to leverage their personal social networks and increase their access to HSSs. GENIE maps patients' personal social networks, elicits preferences, and filters local HSSs from a community service directory based on patient's interests. Trained volunteers (an extension of the primary care team) conducted home visits and conducted surveys related to life and health goals in the context of the Health TAPESTRY (Teams Advancing Patient Experience: Strengthening Quality) program, in which the GENIE tool was implemented. GENIE reports were uploaded to an electronic medical record for care planning by the team. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore patients', volunteers', and clinicians' perceptions of the feasibility, usability, and perceived outcomes of GENIE-a tool for community-dwelling adults who are high users of the health care system. METHODS: This study involved 2 primary care clinician focus groups and 1 clinician interview (n=15), 1 volunteer focus group (n=3), patient telephone interviews (n=8), field observations that captured goal-action sequences to complete GENIE, and GENIE utilization statistics. The patients were enrolled in a primary care program-Health TAPESTRY-and Ontario's Health Links Program, which coordinates care for the highest users of the health care system. NVivo 11 (QSR International) was used to support qualitative data analyses related to feasibility and perceived outcomes, and descriptive statistics were used for quantitative data. RESULTS: Most participants reported positive overall perceptions of GENIE. However, feasibility testing showed that participants had a partial understanding of the tool; volunteer facilitation was critical to support the implementation of GENIE; clinicians perceived their navigation ability as superior to that of GENIE supported by volunteers; and tool completion took 39 minutes, which made the home visit too long for some. Usability challenges included difficulties completing some sections of the tool related to medical terminology and unclear instructions, limitations in the quality and quantity of HSSs results, and minor technological challenges. Almost all patients identified a community program or activity of interest. Half of the patients (4/8, 50%) followed up on HSSs and added new members to their network, whereas 1 participant lost a member. Clinicians' strengthened their understanding of patients' personal social networks and needs, and patients felt less social isolation. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the potential of GENIE, when supported by volunteers, to expand patients' social networks and link them to relevant HSSs. Volunteers require training to implement GENIE for self-management support, which may help overcome the time limitations faced by primary care clinicians. Refining the filtering capability of GENIE to address adults' needs may improve primary care providers' confidence in using such tools.
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 | 0.013 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".