Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29588268›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2018

Satisfying Product Features of a Fall Prevention Smartphone App and Potential Users' Willingness to Pay: Web-Based Survey Among Older Adults.

Peter Rasche, Alexander Mertens, Christopher Brandl, Shan Liu, Benjamin Buecking, Christopher Bliemel, Klemens Horst, Christian David Weber, Philipp Lichte, Matthias Knobe

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Peter RascheInstitute of Industrial Engineering and Ergonomics, Department of Mechanical Engineering, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7974-8668
Alexander MertensInstitute of Industrial Engineering and Ergonomics, Department of Mechanical Engineering, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3703-0401
Christopher BrandlInstitute of Industrial Engineering and Ergonomics, Department of Mechanical Engineering, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6736-7366
Shan LiuDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5602-3717
Benjamin BueckingHand and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Trauma, University Hospital of Giessen and Marburg, Marburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4956-0805
Christopher BliemelHand and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Trauma, University Hospital of Giessen and Marburg, Marburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4666-3187
Klemens HorstDepartment of Orthopaedic Trauma, University of Aachen Medical Center, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7162-6153
Christian David WeberDepartment of Orthopaedic Trauma, University of Aachen Medical Center, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8778-8002
Philipp LichteDepartment of Orthopaedic Trauma, University of Aachen Medical Center, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5033-9964
Matthias KnobeDepartment of Orthopaedic Trauma, University of Aachen Medical Center, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9166-0965
RWTH Aachen University · DEUniversitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg · DEMassachusetts General Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProhibiting falls and fall-related injuries is a major challenge for health care systems worldwide, as a substantial proportion of falls occur in older adults who are previously known to be either frail or at high risk for falls. Hence, preventive measures are needed to educate and minimize the risk for falls rather than just minimize older adults' fall risk. Health apps have the potential to address this problem, as they enable users to self-assess their individual fall risk.

objectiveThe objective of this study was to identify product features of a fall prevention smartphone app, which increase or decrease users' satisfaction. In addition, willingness to pay (WTP) was assessed to explore how much revenue such an app could generate.

methodsA total of 96 participants completed an open self-selected Web-based survey. Participants answered various questions regarding health status, subjective and objective fall risk, and technical readiness. Seventeen predefined product features of a fall prevention smartphone app were evaluated twice: first, according to a functional (product feature is implemented in the app), and subsequently by a dysfunctional (product feature is not implemented in the app) question. On the basis of the combination of answers from these 2 questions, the product feature was assigned to a certain category (must-be, attractive, one-dimensional, indifferent, or questionable product feature). This method is widely used in user-oriented product development and captures users' expectations of a product and how their satisfaction is influenced by the availability of individual product features.

resultsFive product features were identified to increase users' acceptance, including (1) a checklist of typical tripping hazards, (2) an emergency guideline in case of a fall, (3) description of exercises and integrated workout plans that decrease the risk of falling, (4) inclusion of a continuous workout program, and (5) cost coverage by health insurer. Participants' WTP was assessed after all 17 product features were rated and revealed a median monthly payment WTP rate of €5.00 (interquartile range 10.00).

conclusionsThe results show various motivating product features that should be incorporated into a fall prevention smartphone app. Results reveal aspects that fall prevention and intervention designers should keep in mind to encourage individuals to start joining their program and facilitate long-term user engagement, resulting in a greater interest in fall risk prevention.

Indexed as

accidentscell phoneprevention

Identifiers

PMID29588268
PMCPMC5893889
OpenAlexW2794977303

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.