Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25629939›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Demographic and health related data of users of a mobile application to support drug adherence is associated with usage duration and intensity.

Stefan Becker, Christopher Brandl, Sven Meister, Eckhard Nagel, Talya Miron-Shatz, Anna Mitchell, Andreas Kribben, Urs-Vito Albrecht, Alexander Mertens

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact, top 100% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Remote Usability Testing and Satisfaction with a Mobile Health Medication Inquiry System in CKD.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2015
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Stefan BeckerDepartment of Nephrology, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany; Institute for Drug Safety, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Christopher BrandlInstitute of Industrial Engineering and Ergonomics of RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Sven MeisterFraunhofer Institute for Software and Systems Engineering, Dortmund, Germany.
Eckhard NagelInstitute for Drug Safety, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Talya Miron-ShatzCenter for Medicine in the Public Interest, New York City, New York, United States of America; Marketing Department, Business School, Ono Academic College, Kiryat Ono, Israel.
Anna MitchellDepartment of Nephrology, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Andreas KribbenDepartment of Nephrology, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Urs-Vito AlbrechtPeter L. Reichertz Institute for Medical Informatics (OE8420), University of Braunschweig-Institute of Technology and Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Alexander MertensInstitute of Industrial Engineering and Ergonomics of RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
University of Duisburg-Essen · DERWTH Aachen University · DEEssen University Hospital · DEFraunhofer Institute for Software and Systems Engineering · DEMedizinische Hochschule Hannover · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeA wealth of mobile applications are designed to support users in their drug intake. When developing software for patients, it is important to understand the differences between individuals who have, who will or who might never adopt mobile interventions. This study analyzes demographic and health-related factors associated with real-life "longer usage" and the "usage-intensity per day" of the mobile application "Medication Plan".

methodsBetween 2010-2012, the mobile application "Medication Plan" could be downloaded free of charge from the Apple-App-Store. It was aimed at supporting the regular and correct intake of medication. Demographic and health-related data were collected via an online questionnaire. This study analyzed captured data.

resultsApp-related activities of 1799 users (1708 complete data sets) were recorded. 69% (1183/1708) applied "Medication Plan" for more than a day. 74% were male (872/1183), the median age 45 years. Variance analysis showed a significant effect of the users' age with respect to duration of usage (p = 0.025). While the mean duration of use was only 23.3 days for users younger than 21 years, for older users, there was a substantial increase over all age cohorts up to users of 60 years and above (103.9 days). Sex and educational status had no effect. "Daily usage intensity" was directly associated with an increasing number of prescribed medications and increased from an average of 1.87 uses per day and 1 drug per day to on average 3.71 uses per day for users stating to be taking more than 7 different drugs a day (p<0.001). Demographic predictors (sex, age and educational attainment) did not affect usage intensity.

conclusionUsers aged 60+ as well as those with complicated therapeutic drug regimens relied on the service we provided for more than three months on average. Mobile applications may be a promising approach to support the treatment of patients with chronic conditions.

Indexed as

Medication AdherenceAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMobile ApplicationsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID25629939
PMCPMC4309600
OpenAlexW78982992

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.