MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4281788933 · doi:10.2196/preprints.39049

Correction: Multimedia Knowledge Translation Tools for Parents About Childhood Heart Failure: Environmental Scan (Preprint)

2022· preprint· en· W4281788933 on OpenAlexaffabout
Chentel Cunningham, Hyelin Sung, James Benoit, Jennifer Conway, Shannon D. Scott

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUploadKnowledge translationKey (lock)The InternetWorld Wide WebInclusion (mineral)Computer scienceMedical educationMultimediaPsychologyMedicineKnowledge management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNSTRUCTURED Childhood heart failure is a factor in many hospital admissions each year. It can impose a steep learning curve for parents who need to learn the key information to care for their child at home. In this study, we conducted an environmental scan to identify and assess web-based knowledge translation tools about childhood heart failure for parent audiences developed within North America. The aim of this study is to inventory tools publicly available to parents about childhood heart failure from popular web-based venues, assess how each tool communicates health information, and explore how they were developed. Our search strategy included two commonly used multimedia-based platforms: two app stores (Google Play and Apple App Store) and one search engine (Advanced Google Search). Common search terms were used, and results were uploaded to Microsoft Excel for screening between 2 reviewers. The inclusion criteria for the tools were as follows: content focused on educating parents about their child's heart failure, developed in the English language, and originating within Canada and the United States. A total of 2 reviewers screened the app store and internet search results for relevant tools. Each tool was assessed using the Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM), a validated tool that objectively assesses the suitability of how health information is communicated to a particular audience. Key informants who were involved in tool development were identified and invited for a qualitative interview using a semistructured format to provide data about the development process. Key themes were identified in the semistructured interview process. Frequencies and SAM percent ratings of eligible tools were reported. No apps exist for parents relating to pediatric heart failure. Overall, 17 relevant internet tools were identified, and their suitability was assessed for the parent audience. Most tools scored well in layout and type, but they scored lower in readability and graphics. Qualitative interviews with key informants revealed three key themes: timely and introductory knowledge, credible and trustworthy knowledge, and challenges and evolution in knowledge. This is the first environmental scan looking for parent tools relating to childhood heart failure in Canada and the United States. Findings from this study reveal that there are no apps on this topic and there is a small number of tools for parents on the internet (n=17). Using the SAM, no tools scored in the superior range, and further work in knowledge translation strategies needs to be done in this area to improve more effective education to parents and caregivers who have a child with heart failure. These findings will inform the development of a new resource on children's heart failure that targets parents and caregiver audiences.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.169
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.169
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0100.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0700.033

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMobile Health and mHealth Applications→French-language works237,207→