Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29942593›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Challenges and opportunities in evaluating a digital sexual health intervention in a clinic setting: Staff and patient views.

J V Bailey, N Tomlinson, L J Hobbs, R Webster

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  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

4 authors.

J V BaileyUCL E-Health unit, Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.
N TomlinsonUCL E-Health unit, Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.
L J HobbsUCL E-Health unit, Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.
R WebsterUCL E-Health unit, Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.

Funding

Department of Health 10/131/01Department of Health 11/3009/04Medical Research Council G0701749
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of the study was to gather the views of sexual health clinic staff and male clinic users regarding digital sexual health promotion and online trial procedures.

methodsThe Men's Safer Sex website was offered on tablet computers to men in the waiting rooms of three sexual health clinics, in a feasibility online randomised controlled trial (RCT). Interviews were conducted with 11 men who had participated in the trial and with nine clinic staff, to explore their views of the website and views of the online trial. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed, and we conducted a thematic analysis of interviews and of 281 free text comments from the online RCT outcome questionnaires.

resultsClinic users and staff felt that digital interventions such as the Men's Safer Sex website are useful, especially if NHS endorsed. Pre-appointment waiting time presents a good opportunity for intervention but clinic users and staff felt that a website should supplement rather than replace face-to-face healthcare. The RCT procedures fitted well around clinical activities, but men did not self-direct to the tablet computers. Staff were more concerned about consent and confidentiality than clinic users, and staff and patients were frustrated by multiple technical problems. The trial outcome questionnaire was thought-provoking and could constitute an intervention in itself. Participants felt that clinics would need to promote a digital intervention and/or offer the site routinely to promote engagement.

conclusionDigital interventions could usefully supplement in-person sexual health care, but there are important obstacles in terms of IT access in NHS settings, and in promoting engagement.

Indexed as

Condomsdigital healthfeasibilitymenprocess evaluationqualitativerandomised controlled trialsafe sexsexual health

Identifiers

PMID29942593
PMCPMC6001223

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.