Current state of online education for stroke survivors and family caregivers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BackgroundProvision of online patient education resources are increasing internationally as internet use increases among adults and seniors.Option of accessing information online and secure email to ask questions may improve coping post-discharge in stroke patients.Information provision should consider both individual behaviour change (to bridge the knowledge to action gap) and systems level change (bridge the process to outcome gap).Need to provide the right information at the right time and in the right format.Use of technology is intended to simplify user experience and facilitate health behavior change - social media and audio-visual messaging to motivate change and modify expectations.MethodsScoping review of major English language international online stroke support websites from December 18-19, 2017.Summarize key content format and accessibility.Results6 websites providing patient/family information were identified and briefly reviewed from UK, US, Australia and Canada.Key TakeawaysMost websites have accessibility policies in place clearly stated on their websites to comply with WCAG 2.0 (web content and accessibility guidelines 2.0).Online forums/support groups were consistently present.Room for improvement in use of multimedia and alternate-to-print material in providing education.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it