Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31703655›Full record

ReviewBMC public health2019

A research tool for measuring non-participation of older people in research on digital health.

Arianna Poli, Susanne Kelfve, Andreas Motel-Klingebiel

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  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

3 authors.

Arianna PoliDivision Ageing and Social Change (ASC), Linköping University, Kungsgatan 40, 601 74, Norrköping, Sweden. arianna.poli@liu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6554-1559
Susanne KelfveDivision Ageing and Social Change (ASC), Linköping University, Kungsgatan 40, 601 74, Norrköping, Sweden.
Andreas Motel-KlingebielDivision Ageing and Social Change (ASC), Linköping University, Kungsgatan 40, 601 74, Norrköping, Sweden.

Funding

Forskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och Välfärd 2014-4100
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealthcare services are being increasingly digitalised in European countries. However, in studies evaluating digital health technology, some people are less likely to participate than others, e.g. those who are older, those with a lower level of education and those with poorer digital skills. Such non-participation in research - deriving from the processes of non-recruitment of targeted individuals and self-selection - can be a driver of old-age exclusion from new digital health technologies. We aim to introduce, discuss and test an instrument to measure non-participation in digital health studies, in particular, the process of self-selection.

methodsBased on a review of the relevant literature, we designed an instrument - the NPART survey questionnaire - for the analysis of self-selection, covering five thematic areas: socioeconomic factors, self-rated health and subjective overall quality of life, social participation, time resources, and digital skills and use of technology. The instrument was piloted on 70 older study persons in Sweden, approached during the recruitment process for a trial study.

resultsResults indicated that participants, as compared to decliners, were on average slightly younger and more educated, and reported better memory, higher social participation, and higher familiarity with and greater use of digital technologies. Overall, the survey questionnaire was able to discriminate between participants and decliners on the key aspects investigated, along the lines of the relevant literature.

conclusionsThe NPART survey questionnaire can be applied to characterise non-participation in digital health research, in particular, the process of self-selection. It helps to identify underrepresented groups and their needs. Data generated from such an investigation, combined with hospital registry data on non-recruitment, allows for the implementation of improved sampling strategies, e.g. focused recruitment of underrepresented groups, and for the post hoc adjustment of results generated from biased samples, e.g. weighting procedures.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overCommunity ParticipationComputing MethodologiesFemaleHealth Services ResearchHumansMaleQuality of LifeResearch SubjectsSocial ParticipationSocioeconomic FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesSwedenDigital healthDigitalisationNon-participationOld age inequalityRecruitmentSelf-selectionSocial exclusion

Identifiers

PMID31703655
PMCPMC6842243

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.