MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3178462476 · doi:10.2196/27455

Feasibility and Effectiveness of Assessing Subhealth Using a Mobile Health Management App (MibyeongBogam) in Early Middle-Aged Koreans: Randomized Controlled Trial

2021· article· en· W3178462476 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Younghwa Baek, Kyoungsik Jeong, Siwoo Lee, Ho‐Seok Kim, Bok‐Nam Seo, Hee‐Jeong Jin

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialmHealthMobile appsMedicinePhysical therapyGerontologyPsychological interventionComputer scienceNursingWorld Wide WebSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mobile health (mHealth) is a major source of health management systems. Moreover, the demand for mHealth, which is in need of change due to the COVID-19 pandemic, is increasing worldwide. Accordingly, interest in health care in everyday life and the importance of mHealth are growing. OBJECTIVE: We developed the MibyeongBogam (MBBG) app that evaluates the user's subhealth status via a smartphone and provides a health management method based on that user's subhealth status for use in everyday life. Subhealth is defined as a state in which the capacity to recover to a healthy state is diminished, but without the presence of clinical disease. The objective of this study was to compare the awareness and status of subhealth after the use of the MBBG app between intervention and control groups, and to evaluate the app's practicality. METHODS: This study was a prospective, open-label, parallel group, randomized controlled trial. The study was conducted at two hospitals in Korea with 150 healthy people in their 30s and 40s, at a 1:1 allocation ratio. Participants visited the hospital three times as follows: preintervention, intermediate visit 6 weeks after the intervention, and final visit 12 weeks after the intervention. Key endpoints were measured at the first visit before the intervention and at 12 weeks after the intervention. The primary outcome was the awareness of subhealth, and the secondary outcomes were subhealth status, health-promoting behaviors, and motivation to engage in healthy behaviors. RESULTS: The primary outcome, subhealth awareness, tended to slightly increase for both groups after the uncompensated intervention, but there was no significant difference in the score between the two groups (intervention group: mean 23.69, SD 0.25 vs control group: mean 23.1, SD 0.25; P=.09). In the case of secondary outcomes, only some variables of the subhealth status showed significant differences between the two groups after the intervention, and the intervention group showed an improvement in the total scores of subhealth (P=.03), sleep disturbance (P=.02), depression (P=.003), anger (P=.01), and anxiety symptoms (P=.009) compared with the control group. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the MBBG app showed potential for improving the health, especially with regard to sleep disturbance and depression, of individuals without particular health problems. However, the effects of the app on subhealth awareness and health-promoting behaviors were not clearly evaluated. Therefore, further studies to assess improvements in health after the use of personalized health management programs provided by the MBBG app are needed. The MBBG app may be useful for members of the general public, who are not diagnosed with a disease but are unable to lead an optimal daily life due to discomfort, to seek strategies that can improve their health. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Research Information Service KCT0003488; https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/search_result_st01.jsp?seq=14379.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.366 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealth→Same topicMobile Health and mHealth Applications→French-language works237,207→