The Use of Telehealth for Psychological Counselling of Vulnerable Adult Patients With Rheumatic Diseases or Diabetes: Explorative Study Inspired by Participatory Design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Video consultation is increasingly used in different health care settings to reach patients. However, little is known about telehealth in psychological counselling for vulnerable patients with somatic and chronic conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis and diabetes. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop and pilot test a telepsychology module for inclusion in the app My Hospital (Mit Sygehus) to provide remote psychological counselling to vulnerable adults with either rheumatic diseases or diabetes. METHODS: With inspiration from participatory design, the content of the telepsychology module was developed through user involvement and evaluated by individual interviews with patients and psychologists as well as questionnaires. RESULTS: We developed a module with our patient partners that targeted patients with rheumatic diseases and diabetes in relation to the psychological challenges of living with chronic diseases. The module included information, tools, exercises, and videoconferencing. In total, 16 patients and 3 psychologists participated in the pilot test. Psychological counselling was described by 4 themes: "The good relation despite physical distance," "The comfort of being at home," "The pros of saving time on transport and energy," and "A therapeutic alliance at a distance." CONCLUSIONS: Psychological counselling in relation to somatic care can be provided by videoconferencing supported by web-based or mobile delivery of tailored information, tools, and exercises without compromising on the quality of care. To ensure a good alliance between the patient and psychologist, a first face-to-face meeting is important. The home location provided patients with a safe environment and increased accessibility and reduced travel time to the hospital.
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 | 0.023 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".