ArticleAnesthesiology research and practice2018
Utilization of Smartphone Applications by Anesthesia Providers.
Article in Anesthesiology research and practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing the Effectiveness of a Clinical Decision Support Tool in Reducing Pediatric Opioid Dose Calculation Errors: PediPain App vs. Traditional Calculators - A Simulation-Based Randomised Controlled Study.Journal of medical systems · 2024Trial
- The Internet, Apps, and the Anesthesiologist.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Acceptance of mHealth among health professionals: a case study on anesthesia practitioners.BMC anesthesiology · 2020Article
- From Socrates to Virtual Reality: A Historical Review of Learning Theories and Their Influence on the Training of Anesthesiologists.The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPMArticle
- Resident Engagement With a Web- and App-based Journal Club Curriculum Utilizing Email and Text Notifications.The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPMArticle
- Habits and attitudes of smartphone use among anesthesiologists during anesthetized patient care: A survey-based study in a tertiary care center in Saudi Arabia.Saudi journal of anaesthesiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Health care-related apps provide valuable facts and have added a new dimension to knowledge sharing. The purpose of this study is to understand the pattern of utilization of mobile apps specifically created for anesthesia providers. Smartphone app stores were searched, and a survey was sent to 416 anesthesia providers at 136 anesthesiology residency programs querying specific facets of application use. Among respondents, 11.4% never used, 12.4% used less than once per month, 6.0% used once per month, 12.1% used 2-3 times per month, 13.6% used once per week, 21% used 2-3 times per week, and 23.5% used daily. Dosage/pharmaceutical apps were rated the highest as most useful. 24.6% of the participants would pay less than $2.00, 25.1% would pay $5.00, 30.3% would pay $5-$10.00, 9.6% would pay $10-$25.00, 5.1% would pay $25-$50.00, and 5.1% would pay more than $50.00 if an app saves 5-10 minutes per day or 30 minutes/week. The use of mobile phone apps is not limited to reiterating information from textbooks but provides opportunities to further the ever-changing field of anesthesiology. Our survey illustrates the convenience of apps for health care professionals. Providers must exercise caution when selecting apps to ensure best evidence-based medicine.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.