Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27437052›Full record

ArticleApplied clinical informatics2016

Acceptance and Use of Mobile Technology for Health Self-Monitoring in Lung Transplant Recipients during the First Year Post-Transplantation.

Yun Jiang, Susan M Sereika, Annette DeVito Dabbs, Steven M Handler, Elizabeth A Schlenk

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00818025 (Phase III Trial of Pocket PATH), which is not on this map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 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.

NCT00818025 nacompletednot on this map

Phase III Trial of Pocket PATH: A Computerized Intervention to Promote Self-Care

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of PittsburghRan2009 to 2013Enrolled211ConditionsLung DiseaseArmsPocket PATH (Personal Assistant for Tracking Health)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Long-Term Follow-up of a Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating a Mobile Health Intervention for Self-Management in Lung Transplant Recipients.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2017
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. 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.

Yun JiangUniversity of Michigan School of Nursing , 400 N Ingalls St., Ann Arbor, MI.
Susan M SereikaUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Nursing , 3500 Victoria St., Pittsburgh, PA.
Annette DeVito DabbsUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Nursing , 3500 Victoria St., Pittsburgh, PA.
Steven M HandlerUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Medicine , M-172 200 Meyran Ave, Pittsburgh, PA.
Elizabeth A SchlenkUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Nursing , 3500 Victoria St., Pittsburgh, PA.

Funding

VARIABILITY, STABILITY & SMOOTHNESS OF WALKINGP30AG024827 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI Caterina Rosano · 2004 to 2026
$28.6M
Technology Research in Chronic & Critical IllnessT32NR008857 · NINR · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI Young Ji Lee · 2005 to 2026
$4.0M
Phase III Trial of Pocket PATH: A Computerized Intervention to Promote Self-CareR01NR010711 · NINR · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI DE VITO DABBS, ANNETTE J · 2008 to 2012
$3.5M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG024827NINR NIH HHS R01 NR010711NINR NIH HHS T32 NR008857
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo describe lung transplant recipients (LTRs') acceptance and use of mobile technology for health self-monitoring during the first year post-transplantation, and explore correlates of the use of technology in the 0 to 2, >2 to ≤6, >6 to ≤12, and 0 to 12 months.

methodsSecondary analysis of data from 96 LTR assigned to use Pocket PATH(®), a smartphone application, for daily health self-monitoring in a randomized controlled trial. Use of Pocket PATH was categorized as low, moderate, and high use. Proportional odds models for ordinal logistic regression were employed to explore correlates of use of technology.

resultsLTR reported high acceptance of Pocket PATH at baseline. However, acceptance was not associated with actual use over the 12 months (p=0.45~0.96). Actual use decreased across time intervals (p<0.001). Increased self-care agency was associated with the increased odds of higher use in women (p=0.03) and those less satisfied with technology training (p=0.02) in the first 2 months. Higher use from >2 to ≤6 months was associated with greater satisfaction with technology training (OR=3.37, p=0.01) and shorter length of hospital stay (OR=0.98, p=0.02). Higher use from >6 to ≤12 months was associated with older age (OR=1.05, p=0.02), lower psychological distress (OR=0.43, p=0.02), and better physical functioning (OR=1.09, p=0.01). Higher use over 12 months was also associated with older age (OR=1.05, p=0.007), better physical functioning (OR=1.13, p=0.001), and greater satisfaction with technology training (OR=3.05, p=0.02).

conclusionsCorrelates were different for short- and long-term use of mobile technology for health self-monitoring in the first year post-transplantation. It is important to follow up with LTR with longer hospital stay, poor physical functioning, and psychological distress, providing ongoing education to improve their long-term use of technology for health self-monitoring.

Indexed as

Lung TransplantationAdolescentAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSelf CareTelemedicineTime FactorsYoung Adultlung transplantationMobile applicationspatient complianceself-caretelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID27437052
PMCPMC4941851

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.