MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409034592 · doi:10.1136/bmjoq-2024-003114

Evaluating the utility of texting in the ambulatory care of paediatric patients with type 1 diabetes: a quality improvement report

2025· article· en· W4409034592 on OpenAlexafffund
Eiko Waida, Susi Wilkinson

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open Quality · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsInterior HealthVernon Jubilee Hospital
FundersDoctors of BC
KeywordsMedicineInterimAmbulatoryQuality (philosophy)Family medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a chronic and costly disease that is often diagnosed in childhood. Achieving excellent glycaemic control during this period requires attention to multiple factors. Advances in technology now allow clients (patients/family members) to fine-tune their insulin delivery, necessitating support from highly skilled nurses, dietitians and physicians (clinicians). Despite quarterly team-based appointments, interim issues and questions often arise, and families may not always reach out for support. The incidence of T1D is rising, and yet barriers exist to expanding the clinical team. Additionally, clinicians are not necessarily colocated, making timely and efficient communication challenging. We postulated that offering texting as a communication modality would increase client interactions by 20%, and that clients and clinicians would find it a desirable tool in the delivery of efficient and timely ambulatory care. METHODS: A prospective interventional quality improvement project was conducted between July 2022 and August 2023. Baseline data were obtained for the number of interactions. Parents, caregivers and age-appropriate patients were then registered onto the texting platform (N=125) and received a weekly check-in message. The number of interactions and clinical time spent texting and providing care because of a text interaction were collected. RESULTS: There were approximately 30 interactions per week, an increase of >2300%. The average additional clinical time required was 56 min per week (average of 30 s/interaction). Qualitatively, 100% of our clients expressed a desire to continue texting with the team. 97% of clients felt that texting was an important way for them to contact their diabetes team. Our clinicians also wished to continue texting, valuing the improved efficiency of communication and experiencing a greater degree of connection with their clients. CONCLUSIONS: Texting is a welcome modality of communication between clients and their clinical care team in the setting of ambulatory T1D care, resulting in increased engagement.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.219
GPT teacher head0.597
Teacher spread0.378 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open QualitySame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207