Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16867965›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2006

Why are health care interventions delivered over the internet? A systematic review of the published literature.

Frances Griffiths, Antje Lindenmeyer, John Powell, Pam Lowe, Margaret Thorogood

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02581332 (The Effects of Mindfulness Meditation on Fibromyalgia-Related Pain), which is not on this map. Cited by 338 papers, 23 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
338citing papers in PubMed, 23 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02581332 nawithdrawnnot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

The Effects of Mindfulness Meditation on Fibromyalgia-Related Pain

TypeinterventionalSponsorWake Forest University Health SciencesRan2017 to 2017Enrolled0ConditionsFibromyalgiaArmsMindfulness Meditation Training
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

338 citing papers in PubMed, 23 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Guideline
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. The use of eHealth to promote physical activity in cancer survivors: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2018
    Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Pooled it

278 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Frances GriffithsHealth Sciences Research Institute, Center for Primary Health Care Studies, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK CV4 7AL. f.e.griffiths@warwick.ac.uk
Antje Lindenmeyer
John Powell
Pam Lowe
Margaret Thorogood

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs Internet use grows, health interventions are increasingly being delivered online. Pioneering researchers are using the networking potential of the Internet, and several of them have evaluated these interventions.

objectiveThe objective was to review the reasons why health interventions have been delivered on the Internet and to reflect on the work of the pioneers in this field in order to inform future research.

methodsWe conducted a qualitative systematic review of peer-reviewed evaluations of health interventions delivered to a known client/patient group using networked features of the Internet. Papers were reviewed for the reasons given for using the Internet, and these reasons were categorized.

resultsWe included studies evaluating 28 interventions plus 9 interventions that were evaluated in pilot studies. The interventions were aimed at a range of health conditions. Reasons for Internet delivery included low cost and resource implications due to the nature of the technology; reducing cost and increasing convenience for users; reduction of health service costs; overcoming isolation of users; the need for timely information; stigma reduction; and increased user and supplier control of the intervention. A small number of studies gave the existence of Internet interventions as the only reason for undertaking an evaluation of this mode of delivery.

conclusionsOne must remain alert for the unintended effects of Internet delivery of health interventions due to the potential for reinforcing the problems that the intervention was designed to help. Internet delivery overcomes isolation of time, mobility, and geography, but it may not be a substitute for face-to-face contact. Future evaluations need to incorporate the evaluation of cost, not only to the health service but also to users and their social networks. When researchers report the outcomes of Internet-delivered health care interventions, it is important that they clearly state why they chose to use the Internet, preferably backing up their decision with theoretical models and exploratory work. Evaluation of the effectiveness of a health care intervention delivered by the Internet needs to include comparison with more traditional modes of delivery to answer the following question: What are the added benefits or disadvantages of Internet use that are particular to this mode of delivery?

Indexed as

InternetDelivery of Health CareHumans

Identifiers

PMID16867965
PMCPMC1550698

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.