MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393854931 · doi:10.2196/48605

Developing a Tailored eHealth Self-Management Intervention for Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease in China: Intervention Mapping Approach

2024· article· en· W4393854931 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hongxia Shen, Rianne van der Kleij, Paul J. M. van der Boog, Niels H. Chavannes

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBasic and Applied Basic Research Foundation of Guangdong Province
KeywordseHealthKidney diseasePsychological interventionMedicineIntervention (counseling)Self-managementPublic healthChinaDiseaseDisease managementPhysical therapyHealth careHealth management systemNursingAlternative medicineInternal medicinePathologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a major public health concern. Adequate self-management skills are vital to reduce CKD burden, optimize patient health outcomes, and control health care expenditures. Using eHealth to support CKD self-management has the potential to promote healthy behaviors and improve health outcomes of patients with CKD. However, knowledge of the implementation of such interventions in general, and in China specifically, is still limited. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop a tailored eHealth self-management intervention for patients with CKD in China based on the Dutch Medical Dashboard (MD) eHealth self-management intervention. METHODS: We used an intervention mapping approach. In phase 1, a systematic review and 2 qualitative studies were conducted to examine the needs, beliefs, and perceptions of patients with CKD and health care professionals regarding CKD self-management and eHealth interventions. Afterward, key factors gathered from the aforementioned studies were categorized following the 5 domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). In phase 2, we specified program outcomes, performance objectives, determinants, theory-based methods, and practical strategies. Knowledge obtained from previous results was combined to complement core components of the MD self-management intervention and adapt them for Chinese patients with CKD. Additionally, the CFIR-Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change Matching Tool was pragmatically used to generate a list of potential implementation strategies to address the key factors influencing the implementation of eHealth CKD self-management interventions, and implementation strategies were discussed and finalized with the intervention monitoring group. RESULTS: An overview of the CFIR domains showed the essential factors influencing the implementation of eHealth CKD self-management interventions in Chinese settings, including "knowledge and beliefs" in the domain "individual characteristics," "quality and advantage of eHealth intervention" in the domain "intervention characteristics," "compatibility" in the domain "inner setting," and "cultural context" in the domain "outer setting." To ensure the effectiveness of the Dutch MD-based self-management intervention, we did not change the core self-management intervention components of MD that underlie its effectiveness, such as self-monitoring. We identified surface-level cultural adaptations involving customizing intervention content, messages, and approaches to the observable cultural characteristics of the local population to enhance the intervention's appeal, receptivity, and feasibility, such as providing video or voice call options to support interactions with health care professionals. Furthermore, the adapted modules such as Knowledge Center and My Self-Monitoring were developed in a mobile health app. CONCLUSIONS: Our study resulted in the delivery of a culturally tailored, standardized eHealth self-management intervention for patients with CKD in China that has the potential to optimize patients' self-management skills and improve health status and quality of life. Moreover, our study's research approach and results can inform future research on the tailoring and translation of evidence-based, eHealth self-management interventions to various contexts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04212923; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04212923.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicDiabetes Management and EducationFrench-language works237,207