ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2019
Are Austrian practitioners ready to use medical apps? Results of a validation study.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Usage patterns, perceived barriers and perceived impact of mobile medical applications in medical education and clinical practice: a cross-sectional study among medical students and junior doctors in Sudan.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Current status and influencing factors of telehealth readiness among nurses: A multicenter cross-sectional study in Ningxia, China.PloS one · 2026Article
- Article
- Health Literacy Promotion and Digital Interventions for Depressive Disorders.Health literacy research and practice · 2024Article
- The use of medical health applications by primary care physicians in Israel: a cross-sectional study.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Smartphone and Mobile App Use Among Physicians in Clinical Practice: Scoping Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2023Article
- Design and Application of Health Education Apps Based on WeChat for Self-Management among Patients.Iranian journal of public health · 2022Article
- Determinants of physicians' online medical services uptake: a cross-sectional study applying social ecosystem theory.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Telemedical versus onsite treatment at an orthopaedic university clinic: Study of 280 consecutive patients.Osteoarthritis and cartilage open · 2021Article
- Impact of a mobile decision support tool on antimicrobial stewardship indicators in St. John's, Canada.PloS one · 2021Article
- Perceptions of Practitioners on Telehealth and App Use for Smoking Cessation and COPD Care-An Exploratory Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2020Article
- Smartphone and medical application use among dentists in China.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2020Article
- Opinions of healthcare providers on the design of a smartphone application for asthma treatment in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.Multidisciplinary respiratory medicine · 2020Article
- The impact of COVID-19 on hand therapy practice.Journal of hand therapy : official journal of the American Society of Hand TherapistsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs part of the mobile revolution, smartphone-based applications (apps) have become almost indispensable in today's information society. Consequently, the use of medical apps among healthcare professionals has increased heavily over the past years. As little is known on medical app use in day-to-day clinical practice in Austria, the present study aims at closing this knowledge gap by assessing respective prevalence, readiness, and concerns among Austrian practitioners.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional online survey among a sample of 151 Austrian doctors (mean age 45.0, SD 12.0, 55.0% females). We developed a German study questionnaire on the basis of the Practitioner Telehealth Readiness Assessment Tool (PRAT) to assess medical app use-related readiness and attitudes, and validated it using principal component analysis.
resultsIn our study, 74% of participants used medical apps on a daily basis, with clarity, ease of use, speed, and support in clinical routine mentioned as most important app features. However, the majority of participants perceived certain barriers to use medical apps. Younger participants used more medical apps, were more likely to use them during work, and yielded higher readiness scores. The most often used medical apps were Diagnosia and Embryotox (both 28.5%).
conclusionsNowadays, medical apps serve as an important source of information for many doctors and are especially popular among younger physicians. The omnipresence of smartphones in the smocks of healthcare workers raised awareness for potential shortcomings regarding disruption of traditional face-to-face doctor-patient interaction among all healthcare stakeholders. This study's finding thus highlight the need for initiating a public discussion on legal and social frameworks to successfully integrate mobile apps into everyday clinical.
Indexed as
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.