Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28077414›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2017

Implementation of a consumer-focused eHealth intervention for people with moderate-to-high cardiovascular disease risk: protocol for a mixed-methods process evaluation.

Genevieve M Coorey, Lis Neubeck, Timothy Usherwood, David Peiris, Sharon Parker, Annie Y S Lau, Clara Chow, Kathryn Panaretto, Mark Harris, Nicholas Zwar and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

11 authors.

Genevieve M CooreyThe George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Lis NeubeckSchool of Health and Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK.
Timothy UsherwoodThe George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
David PeirisThe George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Sharon ParkerCentre for Primary Health Care and Equity, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Annie Y S LauCentre for Health Informatics, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Clara ChowSydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Kathryn PanarettoCentre for Chronic Disease, School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Mark HarrisCentre for Primary Health Care and Equity, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0705-8913
Nicholas ZwarSchool of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Julie RedfernSydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTechnology-mediated strategies have potential to engage patients in modifying unhealthy behaviour and improving medication adherence to reduce morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular disease (CVD). Furthermore, electronic tools offer a medium by which consumers can more actively navigate personal healthcare information. Understanding how, why and among whom such strategies have an effect can help determine the requirements for implementing them at a scale. This paper aims to detail a process evaluation that will (1) assess implementation fidelity of a multicomponent eHealth intervention; (2) determine its effective features; (3) explore contextual factors influencing and maintaining user engagement; and (4) describe barriers, facilitators, preferences and acceptability of such interventions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Mixed-methods sequential design to derive, examine, triangulate and report data from multiple sources. Quantitative data from 3 sources will help to inform both sampling and content framework for the qualitative data collection: (1) surveys of patients and general practitioners (GPs); (2) software analytics; (3) programme delivery records. Qualitative data from interviews with patients and GPs, focus groups with patients and field notes taken by intervention delivery staff will be thematically analysed. Concurrent interview data collection and analysis will enable a thematic framework to evolve inductively and inform theory building, consistent with a realistic evaluation perspective. Eligible patients are those at moderate-to-high CVD risk who were randomised to the intervention arm of a randomised controlled trial of an eHealth intervention and are contactable at completion of the follow-up period; eligible GPs are the primary healthcare providers of these patients. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been received from the University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee and the Aboriginal Health and Medical Research Council (AH&MRC) of New South Wales. Results will be disseminated via scientific forums including peer-reviewed publications and national and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ANZCTR 12613000715774.

Indexed as

Consumer Health InformationHealth EducationRisk Reduction BehaviorTelemedicineCardiovascular DiseasesElectronic Health RecordsHealth PromotionHumansNew South WalesPatient Acceptance of Health CarePrimary Health CareProgram EvaluationResearch DesignPRIMARY CAREPUBLIC HEALTH

Identifiers

PMID28077414
PMCPMC5253559

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.