Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28764600›Full record

SynthesisHealth informatics journal2019

Women's expectations and experiences regarding e-health treatment: A systematic review.

Carmen Verhoeks, Doreth Teunissen, Anke van der Stelt-Steenbergen, Antoine Lagro-Janssen

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Health informatics journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

4 authors.

Carmen VerhoeksRadboud University Medical Centre, The Netherlands.
Doreth TeunissenRadboud University Medical Centre, The Netherlands.
Anke van der Stelt-SteenbergenRadboud University Medical Centre, The Netherlands.
Antoine Lagro-JanssenRadboud University Medical Centre, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a gap in knowledge of women's perceptions of e-health treatment. This review aims to investigate women's expectations and experiences regarding e-health. A search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycInfo in March 2016. We included articles published between 2000 and March 2016, reporting on e-health interventions. The initial search yielded 2987 articles. Eventually, 16 articles reporting on 16 studies were included. Barriers to e-health treatment were lower for women than barriers to face-to-face treatment, such as feelings of shame and time constraints. Women were able to develop an online therapeutic relationship. As reduced feelings of obligation and lack of motivation were women's greatest challenges in completing e-health treatment, they expressed a wish for more support during e-health treatment, preferably blended care. e-Health lowers the threshold for women to seek healthcare. Combining e-health interventions with face-to-face sessions may enhance women's motivation to complete treatment.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdultFemaleHumansMiddle AgedSocial SupportTelemedicinee-HealthexpectationsexperiencesInternet-based treatmentwomen

Identifiers

PMID28764600
PMCPMC6769287

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.