MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209900067 · doi:10.2196/29027

Patient-Generated Data Analytics of Health Behaviors of People Living With Type 2 Diabetes: Scoping Review

2021· article· en· W3209900067 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Meghan S Nagpal, Antonia Barbaric, Diana Sherifali, Plinio Pelegrini Morita, Joseph A Cafazzo

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Diabetes · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)AnalyticsThematic analysisData scienceDescriptive statisticsType 2 diabetesComputer scienceInclusion and exclusion criteriaData analysisGerontologyPsychologyApplied psychologyMedicineData miningDiabetes mellitusQualitative researchAlternative medicineSocial psychologyMathematicsSocial scienceSociologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Complications due to type 2 diabetes (T2D) can be mitigated through proper self-management that can positively change health behaviors. Technological tools are available to help people living with, or at risk of developing, T2D to manage their condition, and such tools provide a large repository of patient-generated health data (PGHD). Analytics can provide insights into the health behaviors of people living with T2D. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review is to investigate what can be learned about the health behaviors of those living with, or at risk of developing, T2D through analytics from PGHD. METHODS: A scoping review using the Arksey and O'Malley framework was conducted in which a comprehensive search of the literature was conducted by 2 reviewers. In all, 3 electronic databases (PubMed, IEEE Xplore, and ACM Digital Library) were searched using keywords associated with diabetes, behaviors, and analytics. Several rounds of screening using predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria were conducted, after which studies were selected. Critical examination took place through a descriptive-analytical narrative method, and data extracted from the studies were classified into thematic categories. These categories reflect the findings of this study as per our objective. RESULTS: We identified 43 studies that met the inclusion criteria for this review. Although 70% (30/43) of the studies examined PGHD independently, 30% (13/43) combined PGHD with other data sources. Most of these studies used machine learning algorithms to perform their analysis. The themes identified through this review include predicting diabetes or obesity, deriving factors that contribute to diabetes or obesity, obtaining insights from social media or web-based forums, predicting glycemia, improving adherence and outcomes, analyzing sedentary behaviors, deriving behavior patterns, discovering clinical correlations from behaviors, and developing design principles. CONCLUSIONS: The increased volume and availability of PGHD have the potential to derive analytical insights into the health behaviors of people living with T2D. From the literature, we determined that analytics can predict outcomes and identify granular behavior patterns from PGHD. This review determined the broad range of insights that can be examined through PGHD, which constitutes a unique source of data for these applications that would not be possible through the use of other data sources.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.516
Threshold uncertainty score0.712

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.348 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR DiabetesSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207