ArticleInternational journal of telemedicine and applications2014
Online medicine for pregnant women.
Article in International journal of telemedicine and applications, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Efficacy of Internet-Based Self-Monitoring Interventions on Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes in Perinatal Diabetic Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2016Pooled it
- Efficacy of e-technologies in improving breastfeeding outcomes among perinatal women: a meta-analysis.Maternal & child nutrition · 2016Pooled it
- Pregnant Users' Perceptions of the Birth Plan Interface in the "My Prenatal Care" App: Observational Validation Study.JMIR formative research · 2019Article
- Development of a Healthy Lifestyle Mobile App for Overweight Pregnant Women: Qualitative Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2018Article
- Communication Technology Use and Preferences for Pregnant Women and Their Caregivers.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective. To assess the use of cell phones and email as means of communication between pregnant women and their gynecologists and family physicians. Study Design. A cross-sectional study of pregnant women at routine followup. One hundred and twenty women participated in the study. Results. The mean age was 27.4 ± 3.4 years. One hundred nineteen women owned a cell phone and 114 (95%) had an email address. Seventy-two women (60%) had their gynecologist's cell phone number and 50 women (42%) had their family physician's cell phone number. More women contacted their gynecologist via cell phone or email during pregnancy compared to their family physician (P = 0.005 and 0.009, resp.). Most preferred to communicate with their physician via cell phone at predetermined times, but by email at any time during the day (P < 0.0001). They would use cell phones for emergencies or unusual problems but preferred email for other matters (P < 0.0001). Conclusions. Pregnant women in the Negev region do not have a preference between the use of cell phones or email for medical consultation with their gynecologist or family physician. The provision of the physician's cell phone numbers or email address together with the provision of guidelines and resources could improve healthcare services.
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.