Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29948962›Full record

ArticleThe patient2018

The Parker Model: Applying a Qualitative Three-Step Approach to Optimally Utilize Input from Stakeholders When Introducing New Device Technologies in the Management of Chronic Rheumatic Diseases.

Tanja S Jørgensen, Marie Skougaard, Peter C Taylor, Hans C Asmussen, Anne Lee, Louise Klokker, Louise Svejstrup, Irina Mountian, Henrik Gudbergsen, Lars Erik Kristensen

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The patient, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. 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 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Tanja S JørgensenThe Parker Institute, Copenhagen University Hospital, Bispebjerg, Frederiksberg, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-7758-4276
Marie SkougaardThe Parker Institute, Copenhagen University Hospital, Bispebjerg, Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Peter C TaylorNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal, Sciences, Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Hans C AsmussenNATiON, 110 A, Refshalevej, Room 205, 1432, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-3862-724X
Anne LeeUniversity of Southern Denmark, J.B. Winsløws Vej 9B, 5000, Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-3432-0435
Louise KlokkerThe Parker Institute, Copenhagen University Hospital, Bispebjerg, Frederiksberg, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-2463-0990
Louise SvejstrupDepartment of Rheumatology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Bispebjerg, Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Irina MountianUCB Pharma, Allée de la Recherche, 60, 1070, Brussels, Belgium.
Henrik GudbergsenThe Parker Institute, Copenhagen University Hospital, Bispebjerg, Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Lars Erik KristensenThe Parker Institute, Copenhagen University Hospital, Bispebjerg, Frederiksberg, Denmark. lars.erik.kristensen@regionh.dk.ORCID 0000-0002-0686-7102
Frederiksberg Hospital · DKNuffield Orthopaedic Centre · GBUCB Pharma (Belgium) · BEUniversity of Southern Denmark · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveQualitative methods such as semi-structured interviews and focus-groups are used to evaluate the applicability and relevance of device technologies in clinical practice, but when used alone, often lack generalizability. This study aimed to assess the face validity and feasibility of using a composite, three-step qualitative method (the Parker Model), to inform the development and implementation of ava

methodsThe Parker Model combines concept mapping (CM), participatory design (PD), and stakeholder evaluation (SE). CM, a structured group process, was used to identify patients' opinions and concerns regarding the e-Device. Patients used this information in iterative PD sessions to create personal e-Device prototypes in cooperation with a designer and a healthcare professional. SE was performed based on semi-structured group and individual interviews with patients and disease-management stakeholders.

resultsThe study recruited 14 patients, two doctors, two nurses, one medical secretary, and four other public servants. Three CM workshops revealed four key considerations: technical usability, physical design, concerns, and enthusiasm. Four personalized prototypes were developed during PD sessions. SE confirmed that the identified considerations were pivotal for the implementation and adaptation of the e-Device.

conclusionsThis study is the first to apply a composite, qualitative research model when introducing an e-Device for the treatment and management of rheumatic disease. Results show that input from patients and other stakeholders using the Parker Model can add value to the development and implementation of an e-Device.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntirheumatic AgentsCertolizumab PegolChronic DiseaseDenmarkFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInventionsMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchRheumatic DiseasesTherapies, InvestigationalAntirheumatic AgentsCertolizumab Pegol

Identifiers

PMID29948962
PMCPMC6132441
OpenAlexW2807021442

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.