MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394568821 · doi:10.1002/msc.1881

Client and clinician perspectives about a virtual education and exercise chronic disease management programme for people with hip and knee osteoarthritis

2024· article· en· W4394568821 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jill Van Damme, Vanina Dal Bello‐Haas, Patricia H. Strachan, Ayse Kuspinar, Michael Kalu, Mashal Zaide

Bibliographic record

VenueMusculoskeletal Care · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityMcMaster University
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsThematic analysisMedicineNonprobability samplingPhysical therapyQualitative researchNursingPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most prevalent chronic conditions in Canada. Despite the established benefits of non‐pharmacological management (education, exercise) for people with OA, many do not receive treatment, resulting in pain, decreased physical function, and poorer quality of life. Virtual programme options grew significantly during the recent pandemic and may provide longer‐term opportunities for increased uptake by reaching individuals otherwise unable to participate. This study explored the experiences and perspectives of clients participating in and clinicians providing the Good Life with osteoArthritis: Denmark (GLA:D TM) Canada remote programme. Methods This qualitative descriptive study recruited 10 clients with hip and/or knee OA and 11 clinicians across Canada using purposive sampling. An online pre‐interview survey was completed, and individual interviews were conducted, audio‐recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed independently by two researchers using inductive thematic analysis. Coding and analyses were initially conducted separately by group and then compared and combined. Results Four overarching themes (and 11 subthemes) were identified: (1) Expected and unexpected benefits of virtual programs; (2) Drawbacks to virtual programs; (3) Programme delivery in a virtual world; (4) Shifting and non‐shifting perspectives. Although initially sceptical, after completion of the programme, clients were in favour of virtual delivery with many benefits described. Clinicians' perspectives varied about feedback aimed to correct client movement patterns. Conclusions Clients and clinicians identified important experiential and procedural elements for virtual chronic disease management programs that include education and exercise. Additional work is needed to understand if the GLA:D TM remote outcomes are equivalent to the in‐person programme.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMusculoskeletal CareSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207