Digital Health Intervention to Reduce Malnutrition Among Individuals With Gastrointestinal Cancer Receiving Cytoreductive Surgery Combined With Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: Feasibility, Acceptability, and Usability Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cytoreductive surgery combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) can improve survival outcomes for individuals with gastrointestinal (GI) cancer and peritoneal disease (PD). Individuals with GI cancer and PD receiving CRS-HIPEC are at increased risk for malnutrition. Despite the increased risk for malnutrition, there has been limited study of nutritional interventions for individuals receiving CRS-HIPEC. Objective: We aimed to test the feasibility, acceptability, and usability of Support Through Remote Observation and Nutrition Guidance (STRONG), a multilevel digital health intervention to improve nutritional management among individuals with GI cancer and PD receiving CRS-HIPEC. We also assessed patient-reported outcomes, including malnutrition risk, health-related quality of life, and weight-related measures. Methods: STRONG is a 12-week digital intervention in which participants received biweekly nutritional counseling with a dietitian, logged food intake using a Fitbit tracker, and reported nutrition-related outcomes. Dietitians received access to a web-based dashboard and remotely monitored patients' reported food intake and nutrition-impact symptoms. Implementation outcomes were assessed against prespecified benchmarks consistent with benchmarks used in prior studies. Changes in patient-reported outcomes at baseline and follow-up were assessed using linear and ordered logistic regressions. Results: Participants (N=10) had a median age of 57.5 (IQR 54-69) years. Feasibility benchmarks were achieved for recruitment (10/17, 59% vs benchmark: 50%), study assessment completion (9/10, 90% vs benchmark: 60%), dietitian appointment attendance (7/10, 70% vs benchmark: 60%), daily food intake logging adherence (6/10, 60% vs benchmark: 60%), and participant retention (10/10, 100% vs benchmark: 60%). Most participants rated the intervention as acceptable (8/10, 80% vs benchmark: 70%) and reported a high level of usability for dietitian services (10/10, 100%). The benchmark usability for the Fitbit tracker to log food intake was not met. Compared to baseline, participants saw on average a 6.0 point reduction in malnutrition risk score (P=.01), a 20.5 point improvement in general health-related quality of life score (P=.002), and a 5.6 percentage point increase in 1-month weight change (P=.04) at the end of the study. Conclusions: The STRONG intervention demonstrated to be feasible, acceptable, and usable among individuals with GI cancer and PD receiving CRS-HIPEC. A fully powered randomized controlled trial is needed to test the effectiveness of STRONG for reducing malnutrition and improving patient outcomes.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".