MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404886465 · doi:10.2196/60160

Following Up Patients With Chronic Pain Using a Mobile App With a Support Center: Unicenter Prospective Study

2024· article· en· W4404886465 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marta Antonia Gómez-González, Nicolás Cordero Tous, J. de la Cruz Sabido, Carlos Sánchez Corral, Beatriz Lechuga Carrasco, Marta López-Vicente, Gonzalo Olivares Granados

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Human Factors · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintSmart phoneMobile phoneCenter (category theory)Mobile appsPhoneMedicineSmartphone appPsychologyComputer scienceInternet privacyWorld Wide WebOperating systemTelecommunicationsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is one of the most common diseases in the world and requires a multidisciplinary treatment approach. Spinal cord stimulation is a possible treatment option, but these patients require close follow-up, which is not always feasible. Introduction: eHealth apps also offer the possibility of closer patient follow-up, although adherence tends to decrease over time, dropping to around 60%. To improve adherence to remote follow-up, we developed a remote follow-up system consisting of a mobile phone app for patients, a website for professionals and a remote support center. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate adherence to remote follow-up using a system with mobile phone app and a remote support center. METHODS: After review of the literature and approval by a multidisciplinary committee, a team of experts designed a follow-up system based on a mobile phone app, a website for professionals, and a remote support center. The system was developed with the collaboration of healthcare professionals and uses validated scales to capture patients' clinical data at each stage of treatment (pre-treatment phase, trial phase and implantation phase). Data was collected prospectively from January 2020 to August 2023, including total surveys sent and surveys answered, in addition to notifications sent. RESULTS: A total of 64 patients were included (40 female, 62.5%). At the end of the study, 19 patients were in the pre-treatment phase (29'7%), 8 had reached the trial phase (12.5%) and 37 reached the implantation phase (57.8%). The follow-up period was 15.30 ± 9.43 months (mean ± SD). A total of 1574 surveys were sent out, along with 488 SMS reminders and 53 reminder calls. The adherence rate decreased from 94.53% in the pre-treatment phase to 65.68% in the implantation phase, with an overall adherence rate for the app of 87.37%. ANOVA analysis showed that adherence was higher in the earlier phases of treatment (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our remote follow-up system, supported by a remote support center, improves adherence to follow-up, although adherence tends to decrease over time. Further studies are needed to investigate the correlation between adherence to the app and pain management.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.798

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 teacher head, 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 Human FactorsSame topicPain Management and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207