MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392791577 · doi:10.2196/53798

Rehabilitation Applications Based on Behavioral Therapy for People With Knee Osteoarthritis: Systematic Review

2024· review· en· W4392791577 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dian Zhu, Jianan Zhao, Mingxuan Wang, Bochen Cao, Wenhui Zhang, Yunlong Li, Chenqi Zhang, Ting Han

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintOsteoarthritisRehabilitationPhysical therapyMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationAlternative medicineComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The development of digital applications based on behavioral therapies to support patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) has attracted increasing attention in the field of rehabilitation. This paper presents a systematic review of research on digital applications based on behavioral therapies for people with KOA. OBJECTIVE: This review aims to describe the characteristics of relevant digital applications, with a special focus on the current state of behavioral therapies, digital interaction technologies, and user participation in design. The secondary aim is to summarize intervention outcomes and user evaluations of digital applications. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted using the keywords "Knee Osteoarthritis," "Behavior Therapy," and "Digitization" in the following databases (from January 2013 to July 2023): Web of Science, Embase, Science Direct, Ovid, and PubMed. The Mixed Methods Assessment Tool (MMAT) was used to assess the quality of evidence. Two researchers independently screened and extracted the data. RESULTS: A total of 36 studies met the inclusion criteria and were further analyzed. Behavioral change techniques (BCTs) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) were frequently combined when developing digital applications. The most prevalent areas were goals and planning (n=31) and repetition and substitution (n=27), which were frequently used to develop physical activity (PA) goals and adherence. The most prevalent combination strategy was app/website plus SMS text message/telephone/email (n=12), which has tremendous potential. This area of application design offers notable advantages, primarily manifesting in pain mitigation (n=24), reduction of physical dysfunction (n=21), and augmentation of PA levels (n=12). Additionally, when formulating design strategies, it is imperative to consider the perspectives of stakeholders, especially in response to the identified shortcomings in application design elucidated within the study. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that "goals and planning" and "repetition and substitution" are frequently used to develop PA goals and PA behavior adherence. The most prevalent combination strategy was app/website plus SMS text message/telephone/email, which has tremendous potential. Moreover, incorporating several stakeholders in the design and development stages might enhance user experience, considering the distinct variations in their requirements. To improve the efficacy and availability of digital applications, we have several proposals. First, comprehensive care for patients should be ensured by integrating multiple behavioral therapies that encompass various aspects of the rehabilitation process, such as rehabilitation exercises and status monitoring. Second, therapists could benefit from more precise recommendations by incorporating additional intelligent algorithms to analyze patient data. Third, the implementation scope should be expanded from the home environment to a broader social community rehabilitation setting.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.006
Bibliometrics0.0080.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.361 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealth→Same topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→