Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30249580›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2018

Exploration of Users' Perspectives and Needs and Design of a Type 1 Diabetes Management Mobile App: Mixed-Methods Study.

Yiyu Zhang, Xia Li, Shuoming Luo, Chaoyuan Liu, Fang Liu, Zhiguang Zhou

Open access · goldAbstract read
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 26 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
4.6field-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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yiyu Zhang *Department of Metabolism and Endocrinology, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3201-0468
Xia Li *Department of Metabolism and Endocrinology, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8665-7983
Shuoming LuoDepartment of Metabolism and Endocrinology, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8613-8734
Chaoyuan LiuDepartment of Oncology, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5632-3632
Fang LiuDepartment of Metabolism and Endocrinology, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5914-5624
Zhiguang ZhouDepartment of Metabolism and Endocrinology, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0374-1838
Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China · CNCentral South University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith the popularity of mobile phones, mobile apps have great potential for the management of diabetes, but the effectiveness of current diabetes apps for type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is poor. No study has explored the reasons for this deficiency from the users' perspective.

objectiveThe aims of this study were to explore the perspectives and needs of T1DM patients and diabetes experts concerning a diabetes app and to design a new T1DM management mobile app.

methodsA mixed-methods design combining quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews was used to explore users' needs and perspectives. Experts were surveyed at 2 diabetes conferences using paper questionnaires. T1DM patients were surveyed using Sojump (Changsha ran Xing InfoTech Ltd) on a network. We conducted semistructured, in-depth interviews with adult T1DM patients or parents of child patients who had ever used diabetes apps. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded for theme identification.

resultsThe expert response rate was 63.5% (127/200). The respondents thought that the reasons for app invalidity were that patients did not continue using the app (76.4%, 97/127), little guidance was received from health care professionals (HCPs; 73.2%, 93/127), diabetes education knowledge was unsystematic (52.8%, 67/127), and the app functions were incomplete (44.1%, 56/127). A total of 245 T1DM patient questionnaires were collected, of which 21.2% (52/245) of the respondents had used diabetes apps. The reasons for their reluctance to use an app were limited time (39%, 20/52), complicated operations (25%, 13/52), uselessness (25%, 13/52), and cost (25%, 13/52). Both the experts and patients thought that the most important functions of the app were patient-doctor communication and the availability of a diabetes diary. Two themes that were useful for app design were identified from the interviews: (1) problems with patients' diabetes self-management and (2) problems with current apps. In addition, needs and suggestions for a diabetes app were obtained. Patient-doctor communication, diabetes diary, diabetes education, and peer support were all considered important by the patients, which informed the development of a prototype multifunctional app.

conclusionsPatient-doctor communication is the most important function of a diabetes app. Apps should be integrated with HCPs rather than stand-alone. We advocate that doctors follow up with their patients using a diabetes app. Our user-centered method explored comprehensively and deeply why the effectiveness of current diabetes apps for T1DM was poor and what T1DM patients needed for a diabetes app and provided meaningful guidance for app design.

Indexed as

diabetes mellitus, type 1mobile applicationsqualitative researchsurveys and questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID30249580
PMCPMC6231832
OpenAlexW2891342490

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.