MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205336638 · doi:10.2196/32458

Leveraging a Consumer-Based Product to Develop a Cancer-Specific Mobile Meditation App: Prototype Development Study

2022· article· en· W4205336638 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jennifer Huberty, Nishat Bhuiyan, Taylor Neher, Lynda Joeman, Ruben A. Mesa, Linda Larkey

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteSmall Business Technology Transfer
KeywordsFocus groupMeditationMedicineCancermHealthDownloadFamily medicinePsychologyNursingPsychological interventionWorld Wide WebComputer scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mobile meditation apps may offer a long-term, accessible, and effective solution for ongoing symptom management in cancer patients/survivors. However, there are currently no commercial cancer-specific meditation apps that reflect cancer specialist expertise, input from cancer patients/survivors, and features and content specific to cancer patients'/survivors' needs. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to gain insight (via surveys, daily journals, and focus groups) from cancer patients/survivors, health care providers, and current subscribers of Calm (a consumer-based mobile meditation app) who were patients/survivors to develop a prototype of a mobile meditation app specifically designed for cancer patients/survivors. METHODS: Participants were recruited via prior partnerships, word-of-mouth referrals, and recruitment posts on Facebook and Instagram. Cancer patients/survivors and health care providers were instructed to download and use the Calm app for at least 10 minutes a day for 7 days, complete an online daily journal for 7 days, and participate in a virtual focus group (one for cancer patients/survivors and one for providers). Current Calm subscribers who were cancer patients/survivors completed an online survey about different aspects of the Calm app and participated in a third virtual focus group. Data were qualitatively analyzed using a combination of deductive and inductive coding. RESULTS: A total of 27 participants (11 cancer patients/survivors, 10 health care providers, 6 current Calm subscribers) completed the study. Similar themes and subthemes were found across surveys, daily journals, and focus groups, and fell into two major categories, content and functionality, with cancer-specific and noncancer-specific themes identified within each category. The majority of content preferences and suggestions that arose were cancer-specific, such as content related to negative emotions or feelings (eg, anxiety, grief, trauma/posttraumatic stress disorder, fear of recurrence, isolation), positive feelings and finding meaning (eg, gratitude, storytelling, acceptance), scenarios and experiences (eg, waiting, treatment-specific mediations), type and stage of cancer journey, and movement modifications. Some of the noncancer-specific themes under app content included sleep, music, and visualizations. In terms of app functionality, the majority of participants expressed interest in having a section/tab/area of the app that was specifically geared toward cancer patients/survivors. Preferences and suggestions for cancer-specific functionality features included options based on symptoms or journey, being able to communicate with other patients or survivors to share suggestions for specific meditations, and having an emergency toolkit for patients/survivors. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from cancer patients/survivors, health care providers, and current Calm subscribers who were patients/survivors to be incorporated into the development of the prototype fell into two major categories: (1) content of the app and (2) functionality of the app. The prototype's form and function will be pilot-tested among 30 cancer patients/survivors in a 4-week study, and the resulting feasibility data will be used to inform the final app design and an efficacy study.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score0.878

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207