Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24999983›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2014

mHealth: a strategic field without a solid scientific soul. a systematic review of pain-related apps.

Rocío de la Vega, Jordi Miró

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 96 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
96citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
24.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

96 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 199 citations in OpenAlex.

  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. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

36 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rocío de la VegaUnit for the Study and Treatment of Pain - ALGOS, Research Center for Behavior Assessment, Department of Psychology and Institut d'Investigació Sanitària Pere Virgili, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona, Spain.
Jordi MiróUnit for the Study and Treatment of Pain - ALGOS, Research Center for Behavior Assessment, Department of Psychology and Institut d'Investigació Sanitària Pere Virgili, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona, Spain.
Universidad Rovira i Virgili · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMobile health (mHealth) has undergone exponential growth in recent years. Patients and healthcare professionals are increasingly using health-related applications, at the same time as concerns about ethical issues, bias, conflicts of interest and privacy are emerging. The general aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the current state of development of mHealth. METHODS AND

findingsTo exemplify the issues, we made a systematic review of the pain-related apps available in scientific databases (Medline, Web of Science, Gale, Psycinfo, etc.) and the main application shops (App Store, Blackberry App World, Google Play, Nokia Store and Windows Phone Store). Only applications (designed for both patients and clinicians) focused on pain education, assessment and treatment were included. Of the 47 papers published on 34 apps in scientific databases, none were available in the app shops. A total of 283 pain-related apps were found in the five shops searched, but no articles have been published on these apps. The main limitation of this review is that we did not look at all stores in all countries.

conclusionsThere is a huge gap between the scientific and commercial faces of mHealth. Specific efforts are needed to facilitate knowledge translation and regulate commercial health-related apps.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsPainScienceDatabases, FactualHumansTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID24999983
PMCPMC4085095
OpenAlexW1977871037

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.