MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396722029 · doi:10.2196/50620

Monitoring Adolescent and Young Adult Patients With Cancer via a Smart T-Shirt: Prospective, Single-Cohort, Mixed Methods Feasibility Study (OncoSmartShirt Study)

2024· article· en· W4396722029 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Emma Balch Steen-Olsen, Helle Pappot, Maiken Hjerming, Signe Hanghoej, Cecilie Holländer-Mieritz

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProspective cohort studyCohortGerontologyPsychologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Wearables that measure vital parameters can be potential tools for monitoring patients at home during cancer treatment. One type of wearable is a smart T-shirt with embedded sensors. Initially, smart T-shirts were designed to aid athletes in their performance analyses. Recently however, researchers have been investigating the use of smart T-shirts as supportive tools in health care. In general, the knowledge on the use of wearables for symptom monitoring during cancer treatment is limited, and consensus and awareness about compliance or adherence are lacking. objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate adherence to and experiences with using a smart T-shirt for the home monitoring of biometric sensor data among adolescent and young adult patients undergoing cancer treatment during a 2-week period. Methods: This study was a prospective, single-cohort, mixed methods feasibility study. The inclusion criteria were patients aged 18 to 39 years and those who were receiving treatment at Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Denmark. Consenting patients were asked to wear the Chronolife smart T-shirt for a period of 2 weeks. The smart T-shirt had multiple sensors and electrodes, which engendered the following six measurements: electrocardiogram (ECG) measurements, thoracic respiration, abdominal respiration, thoracic impedance, physical activity (steps), and skin temperature. The primary end point was adherence, which was defined as a wear time of >8 hours per day. The patient experience was investigated via individual, semistructured telephone interviews and a paper questionnaire. Results: A total of 10 patients were included. The number of days with wear times of >8 hours during the study period (14 d) varied from 0 to 6 (mean 2 d). Further, 3 patients had a mean wear time of >8 hours during each of their days with data registration. The number of days with any data registration ranged from 0 to 10 (mean 6.4 d). The thematic analysis of interviews pointed to the following three main themes: (1) the smart T-shirt is cool but does not fit patients with cancer, (2) the technology limits the use of the smart T-shirt, and (3) the monitoring of data increases the feeling of safety. Results from the questionnaire showed that the patients generally had confidence in the device. Conclusions: Although the primary end point was not reached, the patients' experiences with using the smart T-shirt resulted in the knowledge that patients acknowledged the need for new technologies that improve supportive cancer care. The patients were positive when asked to wear the smart T-shirt. However, technical and practical challenges in using the device resulted in low adherence. Although wearables might have potential for home monitoring, the present technology is immature for clinical use.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealth→Same topicCancer survivorship and care→French-language works237,207→