MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382394889 · doi:10.25011/cim.v46i2.40272

Video Education Program for Proper use of Inhalation Devices in Elderly COPD Patients

2023· article· en· W4382394889 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hong Zhu, S. Qin, Meng Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical and investigative medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInhalation and Respiratory Drug Delivery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInhalerCOPDQuality of life (healthcare)Physical therapyDry-powder inhalerInhalationPatient educationProspective cohort studyAsthmaInternal medicineNursingAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: This research investigated the utility of a QR code-based video pharmaceutical education program to guide the proper use of the inhalation device in elderly chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. METHODS: The patients were recruited for this prospective study during a COPD hospitalization, with 96 patients in the control group (CG) receiving conventional hospital care and 93 patients in the intervention group (IG) receiving QR code-based video pharmaceutical education from hospitalization to six months after discharge to improve proper utilization of inhalation technology The outcome measures used to assess the effectiveness of the education program were the COPD Assessment Test (CAT), inhaler use accuracy, inhaler technique score, Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ) score and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Compared with CG, inhaler use accuracy and inhaler use scores improved in the IG group, while BMQ-Concern and CAT scores were significantly lower (P<0.05). Improvements in patient quality-of-life and satisfaction were reported. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that the QR code-based video pharmaceutical education program can improve the quality of life and satisfaction of elderly COPD patients.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.215
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical and investigative medicineSame topicInhalation and Respiratory Drug DeliveryFrench-language works237,207