MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312363750 · doi:10.2196/41076

Mobile Health Apps for the Control and Self-management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Qualitative Study on Users’ Acceptability and Acceptance

2022· article· en· W4312363750 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Diabetes · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersProvincie Overijssel
KeywordsThematic analysisData collectionFocus groupCoachingDiabetes managementMedicineSelf-managementQualitative researchHealth careMedical educationApplied psychologyPsychologyNursingDiabetes mellitusType 2 diabetesComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mobile health apps are promising tools to help patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) improve their health status and thereby achieve diabetes control and self-management. Although there is a wide array of mobile health apps for T2DM available at present, apps are not yet integrated into routine diabetes care. Acceptability and acceptance among patients with T2DM is a major challenge and prerequisite for the successful implementation of apps in diabetes care. OBJECTIVE: This study provides an in-depth understanding of the perceptions of patients with T2DM before use (acceptability) and after use (acceptance) regarding 4 different mobile health apps for diabetes control and self-management. METHODS: A descriptive qualitative research design was used in this study. Participants could choose 1 of the 4 selected apps for diabetes control and self-management (ie, Clear.bio in combination with FreeStyle Libre, mySugr, MiGuide, and Selfcare). The selection was based on a systematic analysis of the criteria for (functional) requirements regarding monitoring, data collection, provision of information, coaching, privacy, and security. To explore acceptability, 25 semistructured in-depth interviews were conducted with patients with T2DM before use. This was followed by 4 focus groups to discuss the acceptance after use. The study had a citizen science approach, that is, patients with T2DM collaborated with researchers as coresearchers. All coresearchers actively participated in the preparation of the study, data collection, and data analysis. Data were collected between April and September 2021. Thematic analysis was conducted using a deductive approach using AtlasTi9. RESULTS: In total, 25 coresearchers with T2DM participated in this study. Of them, 12 coresearchers tested Clear, 5 MiGuide, 4 mySugr, and 4 Selfcare. All coresearchers participated in semistructured interviews, and 18 of them attended focus groups. Personal health was the main driver of app use. Most coresearchers were convinced that a healthy lifestyle would improve blood glucose levels. Although most coresearchers did not expect that they need to put much effort into using the apps, the additional effort to familiarize themselves with the app use was experienced as quite high. None of the coresearchers had a health care professional who provided suggestions on using the apps. Reimbursement from insurance companies and the acceptance of apps for diabetes control and self-management by the health care system were mentioned as important facilitating conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The research showed that mobile health apps provide support for diabetes control and self-management in patients with T2DM. Integrating app use in care as usual and guidelines for health care professionals are recommended. Future research is needed on how to increase the implementation of mobile health apps in current care pathways. In addition, health care professionals need to improve their digital skills, and lifelong learning is recommended.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.249
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.397 · 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