MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378218475 · doi:10.2196/46847

Feasibility of Implementation of a Mobile Digital Personal Health Record to Coordinate Care for Children and Youth With Special Health Care Needs in Primary Care: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study

2023· article· en· W4378218475 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David Y. Ming, Willis Wong, Kelley A. Jones, Richard C. Antonelli, Nitin Gujral, Sarah Gonzales, Ursula Rogers, William Ratliff, Nirmish Shah, Heather A. King

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesAgency for Healthcare Research and QualityMaternal and Child Health BureauU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsProtocol (science)Health careDigital healthPrimary careElectronic health recordNursingMedicinePsychologyMedical educationFamily medicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Electronic health record (EHR)-integrated digital personal health records (PHRs) via Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) are promising digital health tools to support care coordination (CC) for children and youth with special health care needs but remain widely unadopted; as their adoption grows, mixed methods and implementation research could guide real-world implementation and evaluation. OBJECTIVE: This study (1) evaluates the feasibility of an FHIR-enabled digital PHR app for CC for children and youth with special health care needs, (2) characterizes determinants of implementation, and (3) explores associations between adoption and patient- or family-reported outcomes. METHODS: This nonrandomized, single-arm, prospective feasibility trial will test an FHIR-enabled digital PHR app's use among families of children and youth with special health care needs in primary care settings. Key app features are FHIR-enabled access to structured data from the child's medical record, families' abilities to longitudinally track patient- or family-centered care goals, and sharing progress toward care goals with the child's primary care provider via a clinician dashboard. We shall enroll 40 parents or caregivers of children and youth with special health care needs to use the app for 6 months. Inclusion criteria for children and youth with special health care needs are age 0-16 years; primary care at a participating site; complex needs benefiting from CC; high hospitalization risk in the next 6 months; English speaking; having requisite technology at home (internet access, Apple iOS mobile device); and an active web-based EHR patient portal account to which a parent or caregiver has full proxy access. Digital prescriptions will be used to disseminate study recruitment materials directly to eligible participants via their existing EHR patient portal accounts. We will apply an intervention mixed methods design to link quantitative and qualitative (semistructured interviews and family engagement panels with parents of children and youth with special health care needs) data and characterize implementation determinants. Two CC frameworks (Pediatric Care Coordination Framework; Patient-Centered Medical Home) and 2 evaluation frameworks (Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research; Technology Acceptance Model) provide theoretical foundations for this study. RESULTS: Participant recruitment began in fall 2022, before which we identified >300 potentially eligible patients in EHR data. A family engagement panel in fall 2021 generated formative feedback from family partners. Integrated analysis of pretrial quantitative and qualitative data informed family-centered enhancements to study procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings will inform how to integrate an FHIR-enabled digital PHR app for children and youth with special health care needs into clinical care. Mixed methods and implementation research will help strengthen implementation in diverse clinical settings. The study is positioned to advance knowledge of how to use digital health innovations for improving care and outcomes for children and youth with special health care needs and their families. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05513235; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05513235. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/46847.

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)0.092
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.488

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0920.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.007

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 head0.301
GPT teacher head0.667
Teacher spread0.366 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicElectronic Health Records SystemsFrench-language works237,207