Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27347255›Full record

ArticleThe open nursing journal2016

The Use of Phone Technology in Outpatient Populations: A Systematic Review.

Ana C Duarte, Sue A Thomas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The open nursing journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Ana C DuarteDepartment of Family and Community Health, University of Maryland School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
Sue A ThomasDepartment of Family and Community Health, University of Maryland School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveA systematic review was conducted to identify the types of phone technology used in the adult outpatient population with a focus on Hispanic patients and psychiatric populations.

methodsA search for articles was conducted on the EMBASE, PubMed and PsycINFO databases. Articles reviewed were peer-reviewed, full-text, English language and published through mid-November 2014.

resultsTwenty-one articles were included in this review and grouped according to combinations of phone technology, medical specialty area and population. For all articles, phone technology was defined as telephone, cell, or smart phone. Technology was used in psychiatry with Hispanic population in four articles, in psychiatry with non-Hispanic population in seven articles and in other specialties with Hispanic population in ten articles. Articles were evaluated for quality. Six articles were assessed as strong, eight were moderate and seven were weak in global quality. Interventions included direct communication, text messaging, interactive voice response, camera and smart phone app. Studies with Hispanic populations used more text messaging, while studies in psychiatry favored direct communication. The majority of articles in all groups yielded improvements in health outcomes.

conclusionFew studies have been conducted using phone technology in Hispanic and psychiatric populations. Various phone technologies can be helpful to patients in diverse populations and have demonstrated success in improving a variety of specific and overall healthcare outcomes. Phone technologies are easily adapted to numerous settings and populations and are valuable tools in efforts to increase access to care.

Indexed as

AdherenceHispanicPatient outcomesPsychiatrySelf-care managementTechnology

Identifiers

PMID27347255
PMCPMC4894977

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.