Trial reportJournal of digital imaging2014
iPad-based patient briefing for radiological examinations-a clinical trial.
Trial report in Journal of digital imaging, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Before the examination: digital check-in].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Digitized and structured informed patient consent before contrast-enhanced computed tomography: feasibility and benefits in clinical routine.Insights into imaging · 2022Article
- Measurement Challenges for Medical Image Display Devices.Journal of digital imaging · 2021Review
- Structured Digital Self-Assessment of Patient Anamnesis Prior to Computed Tomography: Performance Evaluation and Added Value.Journal of medical systems · 2021Article
- Assessment of automated clinical trial recruitment and enrolment using patient-facing technology.BMJ health & care informatics · 2021Article
- [Success, satisfaction and improvement of informed consents for computed tomography : A survey among patients and physicians].Der Radiologe · 2020Article
- [Analysis of documented informed consent forms for computed tomography : Completeness and data quality in four clinics].Der Radiologe · 2020Article
- Dematerialisation of patient's informed consent in radiology: insights on current status and radiologists' opinion from an Italian online survey.La Radiologia medica · 2019Article
- Clinical evaluation of e-Quit worRx: a mobile app to enhance smoking cessation shared decision making in primary care.mHealth · 2019Article
- Mobile Workflow in Computed Tomography of the Chest.Journal of medical systems · 2018Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To analyze if an iPad-based patient briefing can serve as a digital alternative to conventional documentations prior to radiological examinations. One hundred one patients referred for routine MRI were randomized into two groups, who underwent iPad-based and classic written briefing in opposite order. For each briefing completion time, completeness and correctness were noted. Patient's knowledge about the content of either briefing modality was subsequently tested. The influence of patient-related factors on the performance of the electronic briefing (EB) was analyzed. Finally, the patient's subjective impression of the EB was assessed. The mean durations were 4.4 ± 2.2 min for EB and 1.7 ± 1.3 min for the classic briefing (p < 0.01). All iPad briefings were returned entirely filled out, whereas 11 % of the classic forms were returned with missing data. No significant differences in memorization of the briefing's information were objectified. There was a positive correlation between the duration of EB and age (r = 0.53; p < 0.01), whereas a negative correlation was found between computer skills and patient's age (r = -0.55; p < 0.01) or duration of EB (r = -0.62; p < 0.01). More than half of the study patients would prefer EB in the future; another 29 % had no preference at all. Patient briefing on iPads transfers the information for the patients equally well compared to the classic written approach. Although iPad briefing took patients longer to perform, the majority would prefer it to written consent briefings in the future. Nevertheless, measures have to be undertaken to improve the overall acceptance and performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.