MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4316928508 · doi:10.2196/39724

Technology-Enabled Collaborative Care for Concurrent Diabetes and Distress Management During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Feasibility Study

2023· article· en· W4316928508 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Lenka Vojtila, Diana Sherifali, Rosa Dragonetti, Iqra Ashfaq, Scott Veldhuizen, Farooq Naeem, Sri Mahavir Agarwal, Osnat C. Melamed, Allison Crawford, Philip Gerretsen, Margaret Hahn, Sean Hill, Sean A. Kidd, Benoit H. Mulsant, Eva Serhal, Leah Tackaberry-Giddens, Carly Whitmore, Jennifer Marttila, Frank Tang, Seeta Ramdass, Gloria Lourido, Sanjeev Sockalingam, Peter Selby

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioMcGill UniversityAssociation of Universities and Colleges of CanadaMontreal Children's HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research InstituteVector InstituteDiabetes CanadaCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersMedical Psychiatry AllianceHamilton Health Sciences
KeywordsMedicineMental healthDiabetes managementCollaborative CarePsychological interventionNursingHealth carePeer supportFamily medicineType 2 diabetesDiabetes mellitusPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the delivery of diabetes care and worsened mental health among many patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). This disruption puts patients with T2D at risk for poor diabetes outcomes, especially those who experience social disadvantage due to socioeconomic class, rurality, or ethnicity. The appropriate use of communication technology could reduce these gaps in diabetes care created by the pandemic and also provide support for psychological distress. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to test the feasibility of an innovative co-designed Technology-Enabled Collaborative Care (TECC) model for diabetes management and mental health support among adults with T2D. METHODS: We will recruit 30 adults with T2D residing in Ontario, Canada, to participate in our sequential explanatory mixed methods study. They will participate in 8 weekly web-based health coaching sessions with a registered nurse, who is a certified diabetes educator, who will be supported by a digital care team (ie, a peer mentor, an addictions specialist, a dietitian, a psychiatrist, and a psychotherapist). Assessments will be completed at baseline, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks, with a 12-week follow-up. Our primary outcome is the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention, as evident by the participant recruitment and retention rates. Key secondary outcomes include assessment completion and delivery of the intervention. Exploratory outcomes consist of changes in mental health, substance use, and physical health behaviors. Stakeholder experience and satisfaction will be explored through a qualitative descriptive study using one-on-one interviews. RESULTS: This paper describes the protocol of the study. The recruitment commenced in June 2021. This study was registered on October 29, 2020, on ClinicalTrials.gov (Registry ID: NCT04607915). As of June 2022, all participants have been recruited. It is anticipated that data analysis will be complete by the end of 2022, with study findings available by the end of 2023. CONCLUSIONS: The development of an innovative, technology-enabled model will provide necessary support for individuals living with T2D and mental health challenges. This TECC program will determine the feasibility of TECC for patients with T2D and mental health issues. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04607915; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04607915. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/39724.

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)0.063
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.336

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0630.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0060.005
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0660.011

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 head0.353
GPT teacher head0.635
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicDiabetes Management and EducationFrench-language works237,207