MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296720432 · doi:10.2196/38506

Impact of an eHealth Smartphone App on Quality of Life and Clinical Outcome of Patients With Hand and Foot Eczema: Prospective Randomized Controlled Intervention Study

2022· article· en· W4296720432 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wanja Alexander Weigandt, Yannic Schardt, Aimee Bruch, Raphael M. Herr, Matthias Goebeler, Johannes Benecke, Astrid Schmieder

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyQuality of life (healthcare)eHealthDermatology Life Quality IndexClinical trialmHealthPsychological interventionHealth careSurgeryInternal medicineDiseaseNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Chronic hand and foot eczema is a polyetiological dermatological condition. Patients experience pain, itching, and sleep disturbances and have a reduced quality of life. Skin care programs and patient education can improve the clinical outcome. eHealth devices offer a new opportunity to better inform and monitor patients. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically analyze the effect of a monitoring smartphone app combined with patient education on the quality of life and clinical outcome of patients with hand and foot eczema. METHODS: Patients in the intervention group received an educational program; attended study visits on weeks 0, 12, and 24; and had access to the study app. Patients in the control group attended the study visits only. The primary end point was a statistically significant reduction in Dermatology Life Quality Index, pruritus, and pain at weeks 12 and 24. The secondary end point was a statistically significant reduction in the modified Hand Eczema Severity Index (HECSI) score at weeks 12 and 24. This is an interim analysis at week 24 of the 60-week randomized controlled study. RESULTS: In total, 87 patients were included in the study and randomized to the intervention group (n=43, 49%) or control group (n=44, 51%). Of the 87 patients, 59 (68%) completed the study visit at week 24. There were no significant differences between the intervention and control groups regarding quality of life, pain, itch, activity, and clinical outcome at weeks 12 and 24. Subgroup analysis revealed that, compared with the control group, the intervention group with an app use frequency of fewer than once every 5 weeks had a significant improvement in the Dermatology Life Quality Index at weeks 12 (P=.001) and 24 (P=.05), in pain measured on a numeric rating scale at weeks 12 (P=.02) and 24 (P=.02), and in the HECSI score at week 12 (P=.02). In addition, the HECSI scores assessed on the basis of pictures taken by the patients of their hands and feet correlated strongly with the HECSI scores recorded by physicians during regular personal visits (r=0.898; P=.002) even when the quality of the images was not that good. CONCLUSIONS: An educational program combined with a monitoring app that connects patients with their treating dermatologists can improve quality of life if the app is not used too frequently. In addition, telemedical care can at least partially replace personal care in patients with hand and foot eczema because the analysis of the pictures taken by the patients correlates strongly with that of the in vivo images. A monitoring app such as the one presented in this study has the potential to improve patient care and should be implemented in daily practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien DRKS00020963; https://drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00020963.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.406 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207