An Intelligent Individualized Cardiovascular App for Risk Elimination (iCARE) for Individuals With Coronary Heart Disease: Development and Usability Testing Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Death and disability from coronary heart disease (CHD) can be largely reduced by improving risk factor management. However, adhering to evidence-based recommendations is challenging and requires interventions at the level of the patient, provider, and health system. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop an Intelligent Individualized Cardiovascular App for Risk Elimination (iCARE) to facilitate adherence to health behaviors and preventive medications, and to test the usability of iCARE. METHODS: We developed iCARE based on a user-centered design approach, which included 4 phases: (1) function design, (2) iterative design, (3) expert inspections and walkthroughs of the prototypes, and (4) usability testing with end users. The usability testing of iCARE included 2 stages: stage I, which included a task analysis and a usability evaluation (January to March 2019) of the iCARE patient app using the modified Health Information Technology Usability Survey (Health-ITUES); and stage II (June 2020), which used the Health-ITUES among end users who used the app for 6 months. The end users were individuals with a confirmed diagnosis of CHD from 2 university-affiliated hospitals in Beijing, China. RESULTS: iCARE consists of a patient app, a care provider app, and a cloud platform. It has a set of algorithms that trigger tailored feedback and can send individualized interventions based on data from initial assessment and health monitoring via manual entry or wearable devices. For stage I usability testing, 88 hospitalized patients (72% [63/88] male; mean age 60 [SD 9.9] years) with CHD were included in the study. The mean score of the usability testing was 90.1 (interquartile range 83.3-99.0). Among enrolled participants, 90% (79/88) were satisfied with iCARE; 94% (83/88) and 82% (72/88) reported that iCARE was useful and easy to use, respectively. For stage II usability testing, 61 individuals with CHD (85% [52/61] male; mean age 53 [SD 8.2] years) who were from an intervention arm and used iCARE for at least six months were included. The mean total score on usability testing based on the questionnaire was 89.0 (interquartile distance: 77.0-99.5). Among enrolled participants, 89% (54/61) were satisfied with the use of iCARE, 93% (57/61) perceived it as useful, and 70% (43/61) as easy to use. CONCLUSIONS: This study developed an intelligent, individualized, evidence-based, and theory-driven app (iCARE) to improve patients' adherence to health behaviors and medication management. iCARE was identified to be highly acceptable, useful, and easy to use among individuals with a diagnosis of CHD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR-INR-16010242; https://tinyurl.com/2p8bkrew.
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 | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".