Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18373148›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2008

Patient difficulty using tablet computers to screen in primary care.

Rachel Hess, Aimee Santucci, Kathleen McTigue, Gary Fischer, Wishwa Kapoor

Registry-linked trialAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04594304 (Screening While You Wait 2), which is not on this map. Cited by 46 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT04594304 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Screening While You Wait 2: Alcohol and Tobacco Use

TypeinterventionalSponsorWomen's College HospitalRan2020 to 2021Enrolled360ConditionsAlcohol, Harmful Use, Tobacco Use, Tobacco Use CessationArmsBehavioral: Usual care plus eToolkit
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Evaluation of electronic patient-reported outcome assessment in inpatient cancer care: a feasibility study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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.

Rachel HessDivision of General Internal Medicine and Center for Research on Health Care, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15206, USA. hessr@upmc.edu
Aimee Santucci
Kathleen McTigue
Gary Fischer
Wishwa Kapoor

Funding

University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR000005 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI REIS, STEVEN E · 2012 to 2015
$50.8M
Does Menopause Matter?K23AG024254 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI HESS, RACHEL · 2004 to 2008
$763k
Environmental Influences of Weight DevelopmentK08DK067192 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI MCTIGUE, KATHLEEN M · 2004 to 2008
$634k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000005NIA NIH HHS AG024254NIA NIH HHS K23 AG024254NIDDK NIH HHS DK067192NIDDK NIH HHS K08 DK067192
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient-administered computerized questionnaires represent a novel tool to assist primary care physicians in the delivery of preventive health care.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to assess patient-reported ease of use with a self-administered tablet computer-based questionnaire in routine clinical care.

designAll patients seen in a university-based primary care practice were asked to provide routine screening information using a touch-screen tablet computer-based questionnaire. Patients reported difficulty using the tablet computer after completion of their first questionnaire. PATIENTS: Ten thousand nine hundred ninety-nine patients completed the questionnaire between January 2004 and January 2006. MEASUREMENTS: We calculated rates of reporting difficulty (no difficulty, some difficulty, or a lot of difficulty) using the tablet computers based on patient age, sex, race, educational attainment, marital status, and number of comorbid medical conditions. We constructed multivariable ordered logistic models to identify predictors of increased self-reported difficulty using the computer.

resultsThe majority of patients (84%) reported no difficulty using the tablet computers to complete the questionnaire, with only 3% reporting a lot of difficulty. Significant predictors of reporting more difficulty included increasing age [odds ratio (OR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-1.05)]; Asian race (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.8-2.9); African American race (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.6); less than a high school education (OR 3.0, 95% CI 2.6-3.4); and the presence of comorbid medical conditions (1-2: OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.2-1.5; > or =3: OR 1.7 95% CI 1.5-2.1).

conclusionsThe majority of primary care patients reported no difficulty using a self-administered tablet computer-based questionnaire. While computerized questionnaires present opportunities to collect routine screening information from patients, attention must be paid to vulnerable groups.

Indexed as

Attitude to ComputersComputers, HandheldHealth SurveysAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleGroup PracticeHumansMaleMedical History TakingMiddle AgedPrimary Health CareUser-Computer Interface

Identifiers

PMID18373148
PMCPMC2359506

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.