Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21959968›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2011

Factors influencing the use of a Web-based application for supporting the self-care of patients with type 2 diabetes: a longitudinal study.

Nicol Nijland, Julia E W C van Gemert-Pijnen, Saskia M Kelders, Bart J Brandenburg, Erwin R Seydel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 91 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
91citing papers in PubMed, 9 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

91 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Improving HbATelemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association · 2020
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. A mixed-methods evaluation of the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a mobile intervention for methadone maintenance clients.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2016
    Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

31 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.

Nicol NijlandDepartment of Psychology, Health and Technology/Center for eHealth Research and Disease Management, Faculty of Behavioural Sciences, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands. n.nijland@utwente.nl
Julia E W C van Gemert-Pijnen
Saskia M Kelders
Bart J Brandenburg
Erwin R Seydel

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe take-up of eHealth applications in general is still rather low and user attrition is often high. Only limited information is available about the use of eHealth technologies among specific patient groups.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to explore the factors that influence the initial and long-term use of a Web-based application (DiabetesCoach) for supporting the self-care of patients with type 2 diabetes.

methodsA mixed-methods research design was used for a process analysis of the actual usage of the Web application over a 2-year period and to identify user profiles. Research instruments included log files, interviews, usability tests, and a survey.

resultsThe DiabetesCoach was predominantly used for interactive features like online monitoring, personal data, and patient-nurse email contact. It was the continuous, personal feedback that particularly appealed to the patients; they felt more closely monitored by their nurse and encouraged to play a more active role in self-managing their disease. Despite the positive outcomes, usage of the Web application was hindered by low enrollment and nonusage attrition. The main barrier to enrollment had to do with a lack of access to the Internet (146/226, 65%). Although 68% (34/50) of the enrollees were continuous users, of whom 32% (16/50) could be defined as hardcore users (highly active), the remaining 32% (16/50) did not continue using the Web application for the full duration of the study period. Barriers to long-term use were primarily due to poor user-friendliness of the Web application (the absence of "push" factors or reminders) and selection of the "wrong" users; the well-regulated patients were not the ones who could benefit the most from system use because of a ceiling effect. Patients with a greater need for care seemed to be more engaged in long-term use; highly active users were significantly more often medication users than low/inactive users (P = .005) and had a longer diabetes duration (P = .03).

conclusionInnovations in health care will diffuse more rapidly when technology is employed that is simple to use and has applicable components for interactivity. This would foresee the patients' need for continuous and personalized feedback, in particular for patients with a greater need for care. From this study several factors appear to influence increased use of eHealth technologies: (1) avoiding selective enrollment, (2) making use of participatory design methods, and (3) developing push factors for persistence. Further research should focus on the causal relationship between using the system's features and actual usage, as such a view would provide important evidence on how specific technology features can engage and captivate users.

Indexed as

Access to InformationAdultAgedConsumer Health InformationDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Disease ManagementElectronic MailFemaleHumansInternetMaleMiddle AgedPatient Education as TopicPatient ParticipationSelf CareSocial Support

Identifiers

PMID21959968
PMCPMC3222177

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.