Empowered patient: A program to improve people with Parkinson’s communication with health care professionals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Communication breakdown between patients and health care professionals poses an accessibility gap preventing adequate health care. The Empowered Patient Program was developed to support people with Parkinson's in improving their health communication skills/strategies and thus facilitate the accessibility gap in their care. Objective: Our pilot study aimed to test the feasibility and preliminary effect of the Empowered Patient Program within a small cohort of individuals with Parkinson's disease. Methods: We completed a pre-test-post-test pilot study. Eight participants completed the Empowered Patient Program for this pilot study. Data collection was completed by administering a questionnaire prior to the program, immediately after program completion, and three months post-completion. We additionally conducted two telephone interviews with the participants to qualitatively gather feedback on the program. Results: The program elucidated statistically significant improvement across domains/areas of knowledge (p = 0.01) and self-perceived communication skills (p = 0.04) among the participants. Through feedback from the patient interviews, it was confirmed that these significant improvements were owed largely to the high level of organization, intuitive user interface, and suitable content of the program for this cohort. Conclusions: The Empowered Patient Program pilot resulted in a desired outcome indicating its satisfactory development. The next steps are to test the Empowered Patient program in a larger sample.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".