Collaborative Research and Development of a Novel, Patient-Centered Digital Platform (MyEyeSite) for Rare Inherited Retinal Disease Data: Acceptability and Feasibility Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Inherited retinal diseases (IRDs) are a leading cause of blindness in children and working age adults in the United Kingdom and other countries, with an appreciable socioeconomic impact. However, by definition, IRD data are individually rare, and as a result, this patient group has been underserved by research. Researchers need larger amounts of these rare data to make progress in this field, for example, through the development of gene therapies. The challenge has been how to find and make these data available to researchers in the most productive way. MyEyeSite is a research collaboration aiming to design and develop a digital platform (the MyEyeSite platform) for people with rare IRDs that will enable patients, doctors, and researchers to aggregate and share specialist eye health data. A crucial component of this platform is the MyEyeSite patient application, which will provide the means for patients with IRD to interact with the system and, in particular, to collate, manage, and share their personal specialist IRD data both for research and their own health care. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to test the acceptability and feasibility of the MyEyeSite platform in the target IRD population through a collaborative patient-centered study. METHODS: Qualitative data were generated through focus groups and workshops, and quantitative data were obtained through a survey of patients with IRD. Participants were recruited through clinics at Moorfields Eye Hospital National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust and the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Moorfields Biomedical Research Centre through their patient and public involvement databases. RESULTS: Our IRD focus group sample (n=50) highlighted the following themes: frustration with the current system regarding data sharing within the United Kingdom's NHS; positive expectations of the potential benefits of the MyEyeSite patient application, resulting from increased access to this specialized data; and concerns regarding data security, including potentially unethical use of the data outside the NHS. Of the surveyed 80 participants, 68 (85%) were motivated to have a more active role in their eye care and share their data for research purposes using a secure technology, such as a web application or mobile app. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that patients with IRD are highly motivated to be actively involved in managing their own data for research and their own eye care. It demonstrates the feasibility of involving patients with IRD in the detailed design of the MyEyeSite platform exemplar, with input from the patient with IRD workshops playing a key role in determining both the functionality and accessibility of the designs and prototypes. The development of a user-centered technological solution to the problem of rare health data has the potential to benefit not only the patient with IRD community but also others with rare diseases.
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 | 0.183 | 0.242 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".