Telehealth nursing interventions for phenotypes of older adults with COPD: an exploratory study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Inconclusive results exist around the effectiveness of telemonitoring for patients with COPD, and studies recommended conducting subgroup analyses to identify patient phenotypes that could benefit from these services. This exploratory study investigated what type of COPD patients were receiving which type of telenursing interventions more frequently using the telemonitoring platform. Methods: A sample of 36 older adults with COPD were receiving telenursing services for 12 months and were asked to answer five COPD-symptom related questions and submit their vital signs daily. Results: Findings revealed two phenotypes of older adults for whom the frequency of telenursing calls and related interventions differed. Although no statistically significant differences were observed in participants' GOLD grades and hospitalizations, cluster one participants used their COPD action plan significantly more frequently, and were in frequent contact with the telenurse. Discussion: It is paramount that further research is needed on the development of patient phenotypes who may benefit from telemonitoring.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".