MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296267086 · doi:10.1093/her/cyac022

Controlled pilot test of a translated cardiac rehabilitation education curriculum in percutaneous coronary intervention patients in a middle-income country delivered using WeChat: acceptability, engagement, satisfaction and preliminary outcomes

2022· article· en· W4296267086 on OpenAlex
Xiaotong Liu, Sherry L. Grace, Gabriela L. M. Ghisi, Wendan Shi, Chengxing Shen, Paul Oh, Yonglou Zhang

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Education Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteYork UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumRehabilitationTest (biology)MedicineIntervention (counseling)Low and middle income countriesPercutaneous coronary interventionPhysical therapyMedical educationPsychologyNursingDeveloping countryInternal medicinePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In China, despite the rapid increase in percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs), cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is just burgeoning, leaving a need for comprehensive evidence-based education curricula. This pilot study assessed the acceptability of Simplified Chinese CR education delivered via booklets and videos on WeChat asynchronously and the impact on improving knowledge, risk factors, health behaviors and quality of life. In this pre-post, controlled, observational study, interested PCI patients received the 12-week intervention or usual care and WeChat without education. Participants completed validated surveys, including the Coronary Artery Disease Education-Questionnaire and Self-Management Scale. Acceptability (14 Likert-type items), engagement (minutes per week) and satisfaction were assessed in intervention participants. Ninety-six patients consented to participate (n = 49 intervention), of which 66 (68.8%) completed the follow-up assessments. Twenty-seven (77.1%) retained intervention participants engaged with the materials, rating content as highly acceptable (all means ≥4/5) and satisfactory (2.19 ± 0.48/3); those engaging more with the intervention were significantly more satisfied (P = 0.03). While participants in both groups achieved some improvements, only intervention participants had significant increases in disease-related knowledge, reductions in body mass index and triglycerides, as well as improvements in diet (all P < 0.05). In this first study validating the recently translated CR patient education intervention, acceptability and benefits have been supported.

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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.380 · 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