MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405729448 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-085083

Transforming Households with Refraction and Innovative Financial Technology (THRIFT): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of vision interventions and online banking among the elderly in Kurigram

2024· article· en· W4405729448 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sharmin Akter Shitol, Ishrat Binte Aftab, Prabhath Piyasena, Lynne Lohfeld, Sridevi Rayasam, Nagamani Challa, Payal Sangani, Lovemore Nyasha Sigwadhi, Habibur Rahman, Rohit Khanna, Ving Fai Chan, Mrittika Barua, Sonia Pant, Achyuta Adhvaryu, Anant Nyshadham, Malabika Sarker, Asha Latha Mettla, Enam Haque, Greame MacKenzie, S.K. Mahbub Alam, Ella Gudwin, Mike Clarke, Abu Shonchoy, Atonu Rabbani, Nathan Congdon

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's University BelfastQueen's UniversityWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionGovernment (linguistics)Family medicineFinanceNursingBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Presbyopia, difficulty in seeing close-ups, affects a billion people globally. Mobile financial services (MFS) have been mandated since January 2021 for Bangladesh government social safety net payments, including old age allowance (OAA) and widow allowance (WA). We report the protocol for the Transforming Households with Refraction and Innovative Financial Technology randomised trial assessing the impact on the use of online banking of providing presbyopic safety net beneficiaries with reading glasses, and brief smartphone and mobile banking app training. METHODS AND ANALYSES: Eligible participants (n=484) are OAA (men aged 65-70 years; women aged 62-70) or WA recipients (women aged 48-60) with presbyopia as their only vision problem, passing a smartphone-based test of numeracy, cognition and dexterity, and not currently owning a smartphone or independently using MFS. All participants receive smartphones loaded with a mobile banking app and a transaction-tracking app and are randomised 1:1 to receive immediate free near-vision glasses and half-day training for smartphone and banking app use (intervention), or glasses and training 12 months later (control). The primary outcome is the mean quarterly number of mobile bank transactions over the 12-month follow-up period, comparing study groups, with and without adjustment. Secondary outcomes include food security, healthcare access and social connectedness. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol was approved by ethics committees at Queen's University Belfast (reference #MHLS22_69) and BRAC James P Grant School of Public Health (reference #IRB-21 August'22-028). The trial is conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and national regulations in Bangladesh, and results will be published in open-access, peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05510687; ClinicalTrials.gov.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0080.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0850.013

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.406 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesFrench-language works237,207