Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26678294›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2015

"Why Didn't it Work?" Lessons From a Randomized Controlled Trial of a Web-based Personally Controlled Health Management System for Adults with Asthma.

Annie Y S Lau, Amaël Arguel, Sarah Dennis, Siaw-Teng Liaw, Enrico Coiera

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
12.8field-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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Adult patient access to electronic health records.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. A Fourth Trimester Action Plan for Wellness.The Journal of perinatal education · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Annie Y S LauCentre for Health Informatics, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia. annie.lau@mq.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3028-4222
Macquarie University · AUThe University of Sydney · AUUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPersonally controlled health management systems (PCHMS), which may include a personal health record (PHR), health management tools, and information resources, have been advocated as a next-generation technology to improve health behaviors and outcomes. There have been successful trials of PCHMS in various health settings. However, there is mixed evidence for whether consumers will use these systems over the long term and whether they ultimately lead to improved health outcomes and behaviors.

objectiveThe aim was to test whether use of a PCHMS by consumers can increase the uptake or updating of a written asthma action plan (AAP) among adults with asthma.

methodsA 12-month parallel 2-group randomized controlled trial was conducted. Participants living with asthma were recruited nationally in Australia between April and August 2013, and randomized 1:1 to either the PCHMS group or control group (online static educational content). The primary outcome measure was possession of an up-to-date written AAP poststudy. Secondary measures included (1) utilizing the AAP; (2) planned or unplanned visits to a health care professional for asthma-related concerns; (3) severe asthma exacerbation, inadequately controlled asthma, or worsening of asthma that required a change in treatment; and (4) number of days lost from work or study due to asthma. Ancillary analyses examined reasons for adoption or nonadoption of the intervention. Outcome measures were collected by online questionnaire prestudy, monthly, and poststudy.

resultsA total of 330 eligible participants were randomized into 1 of 2 arms (intervention: n=154; control: n=176). Access to the PCHMS was not associated with a significant difference in any of the primary or secondary outcomes. Most participants (80.5%, 124/154) did not access the intervention or accessed it only once.

conclusionsDespite the intervention being effective in other preventive care settings, system use was negligible and outcome changes were not seen as a result. Consumers must perceive the need for assistance with a task and assign priority to the task supported by the eHealth intervention. Additionally, the cost of adopting the intervention (eg, additional effort, time spent learning the new system) must be lower than the benefit. Otherwise, there is high risk consumers will not adopt the eHealth intervention.

trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12612000716864; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=362714 (Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/6dMV6hg4A).

Indexed as

AdultAsthmaFemaleHealth Records, PersonalHumansInternetMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesTelemedicineadultasthmaeHealthInternetinterventionpersonal health recordpersonally controlled health management systemself-management

Identifiers

PMID26678294
PMCPMC4704895
OpenAlexW2206584476

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.