MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416580899 · doi:10.2196/82262

mHealth as a Key Component of a New Model of Primary Care for Older Adults

2025· article· en· W4416580899 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jean Woo, Ruby Yu, Maggie Wong, Ken Cheung

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLife expectancyMetric (unit)mHealthReferralPopulationHealth carePrimary careDigital healthComponent (thermodynamics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unlabelled: With population aging, an increase in total life expectancy at birth (TLE) should ideally be accompanied by an equal increase in health span (HS), or by a trend in increasing HS/TLE ratio. Hong Kong has one of the longest life expectancies in the world; however, there is a trend of declining HS/TLE ratio, such that the absolute number of people with dependencies is increasing. To address this challenge, the World Health Organization proposed the model of integrated care for older people (ICOPE) that combines both health and social elements in community care, using the measurement of intrinsic capacity (IC) as a metric for monitoring the performance in different countries. The use of technology is essential in achieving a wide coverage of the population in assessing IC, followed by an individually tailored plan of action. This model can be adapted to different health and social care systems in different countries. Hong Kong has an extensive network of community centers, where the basic assessment may be based, followed by further assessments and personalized activities, and referral to medical professionals may only be needed in the presence of disease. Conversely, the medical sector may refer patients to the community for activities designed to optimize the various domains of IC. Such a model of care has the potential to address manpower shortage and mitigate inequalities in healthy aging, as well as enable the monitoring of physiological systems in community-dwelling adults using digital biomarkers as a metric of IC.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicChronic Disease Management Strategies→French-language works237,207→