Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23810858›Full record

ReviewJournal of biomedical informatics2013

Older adults and mobile phones for health: a review.

Jonathan Joe, George Demiris

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of biomedical informatics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03843957 (Effectiveness and Implementation of mPATH-CRC), which is not on this map. Cited by 86 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
86citing papers in PubMed, 4 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.

NCT03843957 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Effectiveness and Implementation of mPATH-CRC: a Mobile Health System for Colorectal Cancer Screening

TypeinterventionalSponsorWake Forest University Health SciencesRan2019 to 2023Enrolled77,145ConditionsColorectal Cancer, Cancer, Rectum Cancer, Colon CancerArmsmPATH-CRC, mPATH-Checkin, "high touch" Implementation strategy, "low touch" Implementation Strategy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

86 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

26 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

2 authors.

Jonathan JoeBiomedical and Health Informatics, University of Washington, Box 357240, 1959 NE Pacific Street, HSB I-264, Seattle, WA 98195-7240, USA. Electronic address: jjoe@washington.edu.
George Demiris

Funding

University of Washington Biomedical Informatics and Data Science Research Training ProgramT15LM007442 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI JOHN H. GENNARI, Andrea L. Hartzler · 2002 to 2026
$19.6M
NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007442NLM NIH HHS T15LM007442
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo report on the results of a review concerning the use of mobile phones for health with older adults.

methodsPubMed and CINAHL were searched for articles using "older adults" and "mobile phones" along with related terms and synonyms between 1965 and June 2012. Identified articles were filtered by the following inclusion criteria: original research project utilizing a mobile phone as an intervention, involve/target adults 60 years of age or older, and have an aim emphasizing the mobile phone's use in health.

resultsTwenty-one different articles were found and categorized into ten different clinical domains, including diabetes, activities of daily life, and dementia care, among others. The largest group of articles focused on diabetes care (4 articles), followed by COPD (3 articles), Alzheimer's/dementia Care (3 articles) and osteoarthritis (3 articles). Areas of interest studied included feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness. While there were many different clinical domains, the majority of studies were pilot studies that needed more work to establish a stronger base of evidence.

conclusionsCurrent work in using mobile phones for older adult use are spread across a variety of clinical domains. While this work is promising, current studies are generally smaller feasibility studies, and thus future work is needed to establish more generalizable, stronger base of evidence for effectiveness of these interventions.

Indexed as

Cell PhoneAgedHumansConsumer healthMobile phonesOlder adults

Identifiers

PMID23810858
PMCPMC3836587

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.