MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395038630 · doi:10.2196/54833

Impact of Digital Interventions on the Treatment Burden of Patients With Chronic Conditions: Protocol for a Systematic Review

2024· review· en· W4395038630 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Manria Polus, Pantea Keikhosrokiani, Olli Korhonen, Woubshet Behutiye, Minna Isomursu

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionMedicineCINAHLSystematic reviewScopusProtocol (science)MEDLINEDigital healthDisease burdenHealth careInformaticsAlternative medicineDiseaseNursingPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is great potential for delivering cost-effective, quality health care for patients with chronic conditions through digital interventions. Managing chronic conditions often includes a substantial workload required for adhering to the treatment regimen and negative consequences on the patient's function and well-being. This treatment burden affects adherence to treatment and disease outcomes. Digital interventions can potentially exacerbate the burden but also alleviate it. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to identify, summarize, and synthesize the evidence of how digital interventions impact the treatment burden of people with chronic conditions. METHODS: The search, selection, and data synthesis processes were designed according to the PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols) 2015. A systematic search was conducted on October 16, 2023, from databases PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ACM, PubMed Central, and CINAHL. RESULTS: Preliminary searches have been conducted, and screening has been started. The review is expected to be completed in October 2024. CONCLUSIONS: As the number of patients with chronic conditions is increasing, it is essential to design new digital interventions for managing chronic conditions in a way that supports patients with their treatment burden. To the best of our knowledge, the proposed systematic review will be the first review that investigates the impact of digital interventions on the treatment burden of patients. The results of this review will contribute to the field of health informatics regarding knowledge of the treatment burden associated with digital interventions and practical implications for developing better digital health care for patients with chronic conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023477605; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=477605. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/54833.

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)0.084
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.102
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.442

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0840.102
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.023
Bibliometrics0.0120.012
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0080.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0740.010

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 head0.462
GPT teacher head0.656
Teacher spread0.194 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicChronic Disease Management StrategiesFrench-language works237,207