Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30131313›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2018

A Web-Based Acceptance-Facilitating Intervention for Identifying Patients' Acceptance, Uptake, and Adherence of Internet- and Mobile-Based Pain Interventions: Randomized Controlled Trial.

Jiaxi Lin, Bianca Faust, David Daniel Ebert, Lena Krämer, Harald Baumeister

Erratum issuedAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 63 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing 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

63 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. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jiaxi LinInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, Health Psychology Department, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7021-3621
Bianca FaustRehabilitation-Center Todtmoos, Clinic Wehrawald, Todtmoos, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8250-6712
David Daniel EbertClinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Friedrich-Alexander University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6820-0146
Lena KrämerInstitute of Psychology, Department of Rehabilitation Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2162-0853
Harald BaumeisterInstitute of Psychology, Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2040-661X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInternet- and mobile-based interventions are effective for the treatment of chronic pain. However, little is known about patients' willingness to engage with these types of interventions and how the uptake of such interventions can be improved.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to identify people's acceptance, uptake, and adherence (primary outcomes) with regard to an internet- and mobile-based intervention for chronic pain and the influence of an information video as an acceptance-facilitating intervention (AFI).

methodsIn this randomized controlled trial with a parallel design, we invited 489 individuals with chronic pain to participate in a Web-based survey assessing the acceptance of internet- and mobile-based interventions with the offer to receive an unguided internet- and mobile-based intervention for chronic pain after completion. Two versions of the Web-based survey (with and without AFI) were randomly sent to two groups: one with AFI (n=245) and one without AFI (n=244). Participants who completed the Web-based survey with or without AFI entered the intervention group or the control group, respectively. In the survey, the individuals' acceptance of pain interventions, measured with a 4-item scale (sum score ranging from 4 to 20), predictors of acceptance, sociodemographic and pain-related variables, and physical and emotional functioning were assessed. Uptake rates (log in to the intervention) and adherence (number of completed modules) to the intervention was assessed 4 months after intervention access. To examine which factors influence acceptance, uptake rate, and adherence in the internet- and mobile-based interventions, we conducted additional exploratory subgroup analyses.

resultsIn total, 57 (intervention group) and 58 (control group) participants in each group completed the survey and were included in the analyses. The groups did not differ with regard to acceptance, uptake rate, or adherence (P=.64, P=.56, P=.75, respectively). Most participants reported moderate (68/115, 59.1%) to high (36/115, 31.3%) acceptance, with 9.6% (11/115) showing low acceptance (intervention group: mean 13.91, SD 3.47; control group: mean 13.61, SD 3.50). Further, 67% (38/57, intervention group) and 62% (36/58, control group) had logged into the intervention. In both groups, an average of 1.04 (SD 1.51) and 1.14 (SD 1.90) modules were completed, respectively.

conclusionsThe informational video was not effective with regard to acceptance, uptake rate, or adherence. Despite the high acceptance, the uptake rate was only moderate and adherence was remarkably low. This study shows that acceptance can be much higher in a sample participating in an internet- and mobile-based intervention efficacy trial than in the target population in routine health care settings. Thus, future research should focus not only on acceptance and uptake facilitating interventions but also on ways to influence adherence. Further research should be conducted within routine health care settings with more representative samples of the target population.

trial registrationGerman Clinical Trial Registration DRKS00006183; http://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do ?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00006183 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/70ebHDhne).

Indexed as

AdultChronic PainFemaleHumansInternetMaleMiddle AgedMobile ApplicationsSurveys and QuestionnairesTelemedicineacceptanceadherencechronic paineHealthrandomized controlled trialuptake

Identifiers

PMID30131313
PMCPMC6123541

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.