Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) is a standard instrument regularly used to assess disease activity of patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS). However, the well-being of a patient is also affected by impairment of function as well as psychological status and other factors. The objective of this study was to evaluate if psychological status, stressful life events, and sleep quality contribute significantly to BASDAI. Six hundred eighty-three AS patients satisfying the Modified New York Criteria for AS were recruited from the rheumatology clinics of seven hospitals in China. Patients with other concomitant disorders were excluded. Participants were requested to complete a set of clinical examinations and the following questionnaires: Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI), Zung Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS), Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index Questionnaire (PSQI), Health Assessment Questionnaire for Spondyloarthropathies (HAQ-S), and Social Readjustment Rating Scale (SRRS). Spearman correlation analysis showed that BASDAI was highly associated with degree and duration of morning stiffness, overall pain, nocturnal back pain, overall back pain, anxiety, and BASFI (all P < 0.001), but were not associated with education, HAQ-S, and sleep medication in PSQI (P > 0.05). Multiple stepwise regression analysis indicated that overall pain was the maximal statistical contribution in predicting disease activity (standardized coefficient, 0.335). In hierarchic multiple regression analysis, psychological variables added an only additional 2.7% to the overall R(2) beyond that accounted for by demographic and medical variables, resulting in a final R(2) of 53.5%. Although BASDAI is a very good measurement of pain and stiffness and to a certain extent effect of functional impairment in AS, it barely takes into account psychological status, stress life events, and sleep quality These factors should be evaluated by other modalities.

Objective Sentiment analysis is a popular tool for analyzing health-related social media content. However, existing studies exhibit numerous methodological issues and inconsistencies with respect to research design and results reporting, which could lead to biased data, imprecise or incorrect conclusions, or incomparable results across studies. This article reports a systematic analysis of the literature with respect to such issues. The objective was to develop a standardized protocol for improving the research validity and comparability of results in future relevant studies. Materials and Methods We developed the Protocol of Analysis of senTiment in Health (PATH) based on a systematic review that analyzed common research design choices and how such choices were made, or reported, among eligible studies published 2010-2019. Results Of 409 articles screened, 89 met the inclusion criteria. A total of 16 distinctive research design choices were identified, 9 of which have significant methodological or reporting inconsistencies among the articles reviewed, ranging from how relevance of study data was determined to how the sentiment analysis tool selected was validated. Based on this result, we developed the PATH protocol that encompasses all these distinctive design choices and highlights the ones for which careful consideration and detailed reporting are particularly warranted. Conclusions A substantial degree of methodological and reporting inconsistencies exist in the extant literature that applied sentiment analysis to analyzing health-related social media data. The PATH protocol developed through this research may contribute to mitigating such issues in future relevant studies.

Objective Hemodialysis patients frequently experience dialysis therapy sessions complicated by intradialytic hypotension (IDH), a major patient safety concern. We investigate user-centered design requirements for a theory-informed, peer mentoring-based, informatics intervention to activate patients toward IDH prevention. Methods We conducted observations (156 hours) and interviews (n = 28) with patients in 3 hemodialysis clinics, followed by 9 focus groups (including participatory design activities) with patients (n = 17). Inductive and deductive analyses resulted in themes and design principles linked to constructs from social, cognitive, and self-determination theories. Results Hemodialysis patients want an informatics intervention for IDH prevention that collapses distance between patients, peers, and family; harnesses patients’ strength of character and resolve in all parts of their life; respects and supports patients’ individual needs, preferences, and choices; and links “feeling better on dialysis” to becoming more involved in IDH prevention. Related design principles included designing for: depth of interpersonal connections; positivity; individual choice and initiative; and comprehension of connections and possible actions. Discussion Findings advance the design of informatics interventions by presenting design requirements for outpatient safety and addressing key design opportunities for informatics to support patient involvement; these include incorporation of behavior change theories. Results also demonstrate the meaning of design choices for hemodialysis patients in the context of their experiences; this may have applicability to other populations with serious illnesses. Conclusion The resulting patient-facing informatics intervention will be evaluated in a pragmatic cluster-randomized controlled trial in 28 hemodialysis facilities in 4 US regions.

Background Patients on hemodialysis receive dialysis thrice weekly for about 4 hours per session. Intradialytic hypotension (IDH)—low blood pressure during hemodialysis—is a serious but common complication of hemodialysis. Although patients on dialysis already participate in their care, activating patients toward IDH prevention may reduce their risk of IDH. Interactive, technology-based interventions hold promise as a platform for patient activation. However, little is known about the usability challenges that patients undergoing hemodialysis may face when using tablet-based informatics interventions, especially while dialyzing. Objective This study aims to test the usability of a patient-facing, tablet-based intervention that includes theory-informed educational modules and motivational interviewing–based mentoring from patient peers via videoconferencing. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional, mixed methods usability evaluation of the tablet-based intervention by using think-aloud methods, field notes, and structured observations. These qualitative data were evaluated by trained researchers using a structured data collection instrument to capture objective observational data. We calculated descriptive statistics for the quantitative data and conducted inductive content analysis using the qualitative data. Results Findings from 14 patients cluster around general constraints such as the use of one arm, dexterity issues, impaired vision, and lack of experience with touch screen devices. Our task-by-task usability results showed that specific sections with the greatest difficulty for users were logging into the intervention (difficulty score: 2.08), interacting with the quizzes (difficulty score: 1.92), goal setting (difficulty score: 2.28), and entering and exiting videoconference rooms (difficulty score: 2.07) that are used to engage with peers during motivational interviewing sessions. Conclusions In this paper, we present implications for designing informatics interventions for patients on dialysis and detail resulting changes to be implemented in the next version of this intervention. We frame these implications first through the context of the role the patients’ physical body plays when interacting with the intervention and then through the digital considerations for software and interface interaction.