Clinical Perspectives on the Development of a Gamified Heart Failure Patient Education Web Site
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heart failure is a complex, chronic disease that requires self-care to manage, and patients need support and education to perform adequate self-care. Although electronic health interventions to support behavior change and self-care in cardiovascular disease are gaining traction, there is little engaging online education specifically designed for heart failure patients. This paper describes the design and development of a heart failure self-care patient education Web site that integrated gamification, meaning the use of game design elements in a non-game context. We sought feedback on the Web site from a group of heart failure clinicians in a focus group using a semi-structured interview guide, and data were analyzed thematically. Clinician input during the design phase touched on themes such as patients' decision-making in heart failure and older adults' adoption of technology. Clinicians recommended that a narrative gamification technique should reflect real-life dilemmas patients encounter in their self-care. Clinicians also discussed the need to carefully plan reward-based gamification techniques to avoid unintended effects. Overall, a gamified Web site has the potential to support heart failure self-care, but efforts are needed to address the disparity of those with limited computer literacy or access.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it