MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404874496 · doi:10.2196/64171

Practicality of the My Baby Now App for Fathers by Fathers: Qualitative Case Study

2024· article· en· W4404874496 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mathew Gaynor, Kylie D. Hesketh, Kidane Tadesse Gebremariam, Karen Wynter, Rachel Laws

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Pediatrics and Parenting · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintPsychologyQualitative researchInternet privacyDevelopmental psychologyComputer scienceWorld Wide WebSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Evolving societal trends are resulting in fathers having an increasing influence on the health-related behaviors that children develop. Research shows that most fathers are committed to their role and when equipped with knowledge, can have a positive impact on their child's health. However, parenting resources typically target mothers, with fathers being excluded. While evolving mobile phone technology provides an efficient means for delivering parenting resources, many fathers find that mobile health (mHealth) technology does not provide material they can engage with. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore how to make parenting apps more engaging and useful for fathers using an existing parenting mHealth resource, the My Baby Now app, as a case study. METHODS: A total of 14 purposefully selected, Australian fathers of 7 months to 5-year-old children took part in a qualitative study, comprising either focus groups or interviews. Recorded focus groups and interviews were transcribed verbatim, then coded using a combination of deductive and inductive methods. Reflexive thematic analysis was undertaken to identify patterns and themes. RESULTS: Current parenting apps provide parenting information that can be unappealing for fathers. To improve paternal engagement with mHealth resources, fathers highlighted the need for father specific information, with an increase in positive imagery and positive descriptions of fathers in their parenting role. There should be father-exclusive domains such as forums, and also push notifications to provide positive reinforcement and encouragement for fathers. CONCLUSIONS: mHealth has the capacity to deliver information to fathers when needed. This reduces the risk of paternal frustration and disengagement from parenting. Further benefit will be gained by research to understand possible differences in mHealth app usage by fathers of differing socioeconomic position, cultural backgrounds, and family status, such as single fathers and same-sex couples.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.004
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.515
Teacher spread0.407 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Pediatrics and ParentingSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207