Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26618037›Full record

ArticleHealthcare informatics research2015

Evaluation of Mobile Health Applications Developed by a Tertiary Hospital as a Tool for Quality Improvement Breakthrough.

Yura Lee, Soo-Yong Shin, Ji-Young Kim, Jeong Hun Kim, Dong-Woo Seo, Segyeong Joo, Joong-Yeol Park, Woo Sung Kim, Jae-Ho Lee, David W Bates

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare informatics research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Evaluating the effectiveness of the 'patient transport' app in improving healthcare quality, patient safety, and workflow efficiency.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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

10 authors.

Yura LeeDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. ; Department of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Soo-Yong ShinDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. ; Ubiquitous Health Center, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. ; Medical Information Office, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Ji-Young KimUbiquitous Health Center, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. ; Medical Information Office, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Jeong Hun KimUbiquitous Health Center, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. ; Medical Information Office, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Dong-Woo SeoMedical Information Office, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. ; Department of Emergency Medicine, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Segyeong JooUbiquitous Health Center, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. ; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Joong-Yeol ParkUbiquitous Health Center, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. ; Department of Endocrinology/Metabolism, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Woo Sung KimDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. ; Medical Information Office, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. ; Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Jae-Ho LeeDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. ; Ubiquitous Health Center, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. ; Department of Emergency Medicine, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
David W BatesDivision of General Medicine and Primary Care, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the mobile health applications (apps) developed by a single tertiary hospital in Korea with a particular focus on quality and patient safety.

methodsTwenty-three mobile health apps developed by Asan Medical Center were selected for analysis after exclusion of the apps without any relationship with healthcare or clinical workflow, the apps for individual usage, and the mobile Web apps. Two clinical informaticians independently evaluated the apps with respect to the six aims for quality improvement suggested by the United States Institute of Medicine. All discrepancies were resolved after discussion by the two reviewers. The six aims observed in the apps were reviewed and compared by target users.

resultsEleven apps targeted patients, the other 12 were designed for healthcare providers. Among the apps for patients, one app also had functions for healthcare providers. 'My cancer diary' and 'My chart in my hand' apps matched all the six aims. Of the six aims, Timeliness was the most frequently observed (20 apps), and Equity was the least observed (6 apps). Timeliness (10/11 vs. 10/12) and Patient safety (10/11 vs. 9/12) were frequently observed in both groups. In the apps for patients, Patient-centeredness (10/11 vs. 2/12) and Equity (6/11 vs. 0/12) were more frequent but Efficiency (5/11 vs. 10/12) was less frequent.

conclusionsMost of the six aims were observed in the apps, but the extent of coverage varied. Further studies, evaluating the extent to which they improve quality are needed.

Indexed as

Mobile HealthPatient-Centered CarePatient SafetyQuality ImprovementTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID26618037
PMCPMC4659888

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.