MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4307231484

Development of a low resource exercise rehabilitation application for musculoskeletal disorders to help underserved patients in a primary care setting.

2022· article· en· W4307231484 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Edgar, Cameron T. Lambert, Anser Abbas, James J. Young, Willem McIsaac, Rhea Monteiro, Rajesh Girdhari, Lee Schofield, Lisa Miller, Deborah Kopansky-Giles

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCanadian Memorial Chiropractic College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationPrimary careMedicinePhysical therapyResource (disambiguation)Physical medicine and rehabilitationChiropracticAlternative medicineComputer scienceFamily medicinePathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: We set out to create a Family Medicine EHR (electronic health record) embedded exercise application. This was done to evaluate the utility of the exercise app for providers and to understand the usefulness of the exercise app from the perspective of patients. Methods: This exercise application was developed through an iterative process with repeated pre-testing and feedback from an interprofessional team and embedded into the EHR at an academic family medicine clinic. Anecdotal feedback from patients was used to inform pre-testing adaptations. Results: The application required six iterations prior to clinical utility. It had several features that clinicians and patients felt were beneficial. These features involved a customizable exercise directory with pre-made templated plans which could be further modified. To overcome accessibility barriers, the application was developed to include digital and printable copies with an integrated direct email option for ease of remote sharing with patients. Conclusion: A customizable, open-source exercise application was developed to facilitate provider exercise prescription and support patient self-management. This project may be useful for other providers interested in developing similar programs to address musculoskeletal conditions in their patients. Next steps are to undertake pilot testing of the app with broader provider and patient feedback.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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