MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3198185367 · doi:10.2196/28784

A Smartphone App to Support Adherence to Inhaled Corticosteroids in Young Adults With Asthma: Multi-Methods Feasibility Study

2021· article· en· W3198185367 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jane Murphy, Jenny McSharry, Lisa Hynes, Gerard J. Molloy

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUsabilityMedicineAsthmaThematic analysismHealthPsychological interventionYoung adultDescriptive statisticsPopulationPhysical therapyFamily medicineQualitative researchGerontologyNursingEnvironmental healthComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Young adults with asthma often report low adherence to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), leading to uncontrolled symptoms and poor disease outcomes. Technology-enabled digital supports such as mobile health (mHealth) asthma smartphone apps have the potential to support adherence to ICS and asthma self-management. There is a need for feasibility studies to determine the usability, acceptability, and feasibility of these interventions. In addition, it is essential to determine the feasibility of recruiting and retaining young adults to plan future efficacy and effectiveness trials and therefore, establish evidence-based asthma apps. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine (1) the feasibility of recruiting and retaining young adults to a trial and (2) the usability, acceptability, and feasibility of using the AsthmaMD app to support adherence to ICS in a population of young adults living with asthma. METHODS: A multi-methods feasibility study was conducted. Young adults aged 18-30 years with asthma and current prescription for ICS were eligible and invited to take part through a university circular email, social media, and general practice sites. Participation involved completing a baseline self-report questionnaire, downloading and using the AsthmaMD app for 2 weeks, and completing the follow-up assessment, including self-report and open-ended questions about participants' experience of using the app. Primary outcomes included participant recruitment and retention and the usability, acceptability, and feasibility of using AsthmaMD. Quantitative self-report data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and qualitative open-ended data were analyzed using inductive reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 122 young adults (females, n=101, 82.8%) with a mean age of 24.4 (SD 3.8) years were recruited and they completed baseline measures. Of the 122 young adults, 59 (48.4%) completed the study. The AsthmaMD app received a mean score of 63.1/100 (SD 20.1) on the System Usability Scale (ie, a standardized measure of usability for technology-based apps), and an overall user satisfaction score of 5.8/10 (SD 2.2). Of the 59 participants who completed the study, 49 (83%) participants used the app ≥1 day per week. Two main themes were identified in the qualitative analysis of user experiences: (1) learning how to use the app to suit the individual and (2) benefits and relevance of using the app. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this study indicate that it is feasible to recruit and retain young adults to examine efficacy and effectiveness in a future trial and that young adults living with asthma may find AsthmaMD to be usable, acceptable, and feasible to support adherence to ICS. Our findings also identified opportunities to further optimize the usability of AsthmaMD and similar apps. Based on our findings, we recommend providing more accessible information on how to use the app and replacing medical terminology with simplified language within the app to improve usability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN11295269; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN11295269.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.385 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207