Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26220816›Full record

Trial reportClinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN2015

Remote Usability Testing and Satisfaction with a Mobile Health Medication Inquiry System in CKD.

Clarissa J Diamantidis, Jennifer S Ginsberg, Marni Yoffe, Lisa Lucas, Divya Prakash, Saurabh Aggarwal, Wanda Fink, Stefan Becker, Jeffrey C Fink

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. eHealth interventions for people with chronic kidney disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. [Digital nephrology].Der nephrologe · 2021
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Medication Safety + Mobile Health = Patient Engagement in CKD.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2015
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Clarissa J DiamantidisDepartment of Medicine, Duke University of School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina; Department of Medicine, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina; clarissa.diamantidis@duke.edu.
Jennifer S GinsbergDepartments of Medicine and.
Marni YoffeDepartments of Medicine and.
Lisa LucasDepartments of Medicine and.
Divya PrakashData Warehouse and Analytics, St. Joseph Health System, Anaheim, California;
Saurabh AggarwalPrincipal and Co-Founder, Novel Health Strategies, LLC, Columbia, Maryland;
Wanda FinkPrincipal and Co-Founder, Novel Health Strategies, LLC, Columbia, Maryland;
Stefan BeckerInstitute for Drug Safety, Department of Nephrology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany; and.
Jeffrey C FinkDepartments of Medicine and Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; Department of Medicine, Veterans Affairs Maryland Health Care System, Baltimore, Maryland.

Funding

Does underrecognition of kidney disease affect patient safety?R01DK084017 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI FINK, JEFFREY C · 2010 to 2014
$2.1M
NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK084017NIDDK NIH HHS R01-DK084017
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesInappropriate medication use is common in the care of patients with CKD. The feasibility of a simple mobile health tool designed to advise patients on safe medication usage in CKD was examined. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Participants with predialysis CKD (defined as eGFR<60 ml/min per 1.73 m(2)) in the Safe Kidney Care Cohort Study were recruited for home usability testing of a novel medication inquiry system between January and September of 2013. Testing was through two mobile platforms: (1) short messaging service text or (2) personal digital assistant (e.g., iPod Touch). Twenty participants (one half assigned to one device and one half assigned to the other device) were enrolled and received an in-center tutorial on device usage before the end of the study visit. Participants were subsequently mailed three sample pill bottles with the name of randomly selected medications and asked to input these medications into the medication inquiry system. The medication inquiry system response options were as follows: (1) safe in CKD, (2) not safe in CKD, (3) use with caution/speak with your health care provider, or (4) error message (for an incorrectly inputted medication). Participants were asked to record the response issued by the medication inquiry system for each medication sent for usability testing. A user satisfaction survey was administered after completion of the protocol.

resultsAll participants owned a mobile telephone, but few owned a smartphone. Of 60 total medication queries, there were only three recorded errors, two of which occurred in the short messaging service texting group. Overall satisfaction with the application was high, with slightly higher satisfaction noted in the personal digital assistant group compared with the short messaging service group.

conclusionsThe mobile health medication inquiry system application had general ease of use and high acceptance across two platforms among individuals representative of the CKD population. Tailored mobile health technology may improve medication safety in CKD.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHome Care ServicesPatient SatisfactionAgedAttitude to ComputersCell PhoneComputers, HandheldFeasibility StudiesFemaleHealth LiteracyHumansMaleMedication ErrorsMiddle AgedRenal Insufficiency, ChronicRisk FactorsCKDmobile healthpatient safety

Identifiers

PMID26220816
PMCPMC4527038

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.