MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388236167 · doi:10.2196/45947

Exploring Adherence to Pelvic Floor Muscle Training in Women Using Mobile Apps: Scoping Review

2023· article· en· W4388236167 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rosie Harper, Sally Sheppard, Carly Stewart, Carol Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic floor disorders treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchDepartment of Health and Social CareBournemouth University
KeywordsPelvic Floor MusclemHealthMedicineMobile appsPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPelvic floorPsychologyComputer scienceNursingPsychological interventionSurgeryWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Pelvic floor dysfunction is a public health issue, with 1 in 3 women experiencing symptoms at some point in their lifetime. The gold standard of treatment for pelvic floor dysfunction is supervised pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT); however, adherence to PFMT in women is poor. Mobile apps are increasingly being used in the National Health Service to enable equity in the distribution of health care and increase accessibility to services. However, it is unclear how PFMT mobile apps influence PFMT adherence in women. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify which behavior change techniques (BCTs) have been used in PFMT mobile apps, to distinguish the core "capability, opportunity, and motivation" (COM) behaviors targeted by the BCTs used in PFMT mobile apps, and to compare the levels of PFMT adherence in women between those using PFMT mobile apps and those receiving usual care. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of the literature. Published quantitative literature that compared the use of a PFMT mobile app to a control group was included to address the objectives of the study. The electronic bibliographic databases searched included MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and PEDro, along with CENTRAL. Studies were also identified from reference searching of systematic reviews. Original articles written in English from 2006 onward were included. Nonexperimental quantitative studies, qualitative studies, studies that use male participants, case studies, web-based interventions, and interventions that use vaginal probes were excluded. Narrative synthesis was conducted on eligible articles based on the aims of the study. RESULTS: Of the 114 records retrieved from the search, a total of 6 articles met the eligibility and inclusion criteria. The total number of participants in the studies was 471. All PFMT mobile apps used the BCT "prompts and cues." Opportunity was the core COM behavior targeted by the PFMT mobile apps. Higher levels of adherence to PFMT were observed among women using PFMT mobile apps. CONCLUSIONS: Digital "prompts and cues" are a BCT commonly used in PFMT mobile apps, and further research is required to practically assess whether a future randomized controlled trial that investigates the effectiveness of digital "prompts and cues" on PFMT adherence in women can be conducted.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.084
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.084
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.006
Bibliometrics0.0120.014
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.284
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations14
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicPelvic floor disorders treatmentsFrench-language works237,207