MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381480929 · doi:10.2196/preprints.49521

Caregiver needs and perception of data sharing for research through mHealth in pediatric asthma: a cross-sectional survey (Preprint)

2023· preprint· en· W4381480929 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsthmamHealthLikert scaleMedicineDescriptive statisticsFamily medicineCross-sectional studyMedical educationPsychologyNursingPsychological interventionDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<sec> <title>BACKGROUND</title> Asthma is the most common chronic respiratory disease of childhood. Caregivers often report lacking knowledge in several aspects of asthma management at home. While the use of mHealth tools such as mobile applications could facilitate asthma self-management and simultaneously collect data for research, few studies have explored the features that caregivers would like to see in such a tool and their perception for data sharing. </sec> <sec> <title>OBJECTIVE</title> This study evaluated caregivers’ perceived knowledge gaps in asthma management, their perception of certain features and resources that should be included in a potential mobile application, and any concerns that they may have on data sharing for research, including privacy and security. </sec> <sec> <title>METHODS</title> In this cross-sectional study, we surveyed 200 caregivers of children aged 1-13 years with asthma followed at a pediatric tertiary care center in Montreal, Canada. Anonymous data was collected through the institutional online survey platform. We collected the participant’s answers using a 5-category Likert scale (completely agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, completely disagree), multiple choice questions, and free text questions on the topics above. Descriptive statistics were performed and answers were compared between caregivers of preschool- and school-aged children. </sec> <sec> <title>RESULTS</title> Participating children had a mean(standard deviation) age of 5.9(3.4) years, with 54% aged ≤5 years and 46% &gt;6 years. Overall, caregivers reported having adequate knowledge about asthma and asthma self-management. Nonetheless, they identified several desirable features for a mobile application focused on asthma self-management. The most frequently identified features include receiving alerts about environmental triggers of asthma (76.9%), having videos demonstrating symptoms of asthma (66.8%), and being able to log their child’s asthma action plan in the application (66.8%). Interestingly, more caregivers of preschool-aged children preferred textual information compared to caregivers of school-aged children (P=.008 for explaining asthma and P=.005 for the symptoms of asthma). Caregivers were generally highly in favor of sharing data collected through a mobile application for research. </sec> <sec> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> Caregivers of children with asthma in our study identified several desirable educational and interactive features to have in a mobile app for asthma self-management. These findings provide a foundation for designing and developing mHealth tools that are relevant to caregivers of children with asthma. </sec>

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.

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptMetaresearchOpen science
Domain: Reproducibility · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.596
GPT teacher head0.609
Teacher spread0.013 · 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