Effects of the “AI-TA” Mobile App With Intelligent Design on Psychological and Related Symptoms of Young Survivors of Breast Cancer: Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Young women often face substantial psychological challenges in the initial years following cancer diagnosis, leading to a comparatively lower quality of life than older survivors. While mobile apps have emerged as potential interventions, their effectiveness remains inconclusive due to the diversity in intervention types and variation in follow-up periods. Furthermore, there is a particular dearth of evidence regarding the efficacy of these apps' intelligent features in addressing psychological distress with these apps. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a mobile app with intelligent design called "AI-TA" on cancer-related psychological health and ongoing symptoms with a randomized controlled design. METHODS: Women aged 18 to 45 years diagnosed with breast cancer were randomly assigned to the intervention or control group. The intervention was AI-TA, which included 2-way web-based follow-up every 2 weeks. Both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses employed repeated measurement analysis of variance. The participants' background features, primary outcomes (psychological distress and frequency, self-efficacy, and social support), and secondary outcomes (quality of life) were measured using multiple instruments at 3 time points (baseline, 1-month intervention, and 3-month intervention). RESULTS: A total of 124 participants were randomly allocated to the control group (n=62, 50%) or intervention group (n=62, 50%). In total, 92.7% (115/124) of the participants completed the intervention. Significant improvements in psychological symptoms (Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale-Short Form) were observed in the ITT group from baseline to 1-month intervention relative to the control group (ITT vs control: 1.17 vs 1.23; P<.001), which persisted at 3-month follow-up (ITT vs control: 0.68 vs 0.91; P<.001). Both the ITT and PP groups exhibited greater improvements in self-efficacy (Cancer Behavior Inventory-Brief Version) than the control group at 1-month (ITT vs PP vs control: 82.83 vs 77.12 vs 65.35; P<.001) and 3-month intervention (ITT vs PP vs control: 92.83 vs 89.30 vs 85.65; P<.001). However, the change in social support (Social Support Rating Scale) did not increase significantly until 3-month intervention (ITT vs control: 50.09 vs 45.10; P=.002) (PP vs control: 49.78 vs 45.10; P<.001). All groups also experienced beneficial effects on quality of life (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast), which persisted at 3-month follow-up (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: The intelligent mobile app AI-TA incorporating intelligent design shows promise for reducing psychological and cancer-related symptoms among young survivors of breast cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2200058823; https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=151195.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".