Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31848158›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2019

Randomised controlled trial to evaluate the influence of mHealth and eHealth skin cancer prevention education among young organ transplant recipients: the HIPPOlino intervention study.

Silke Böttcher, Christoph Buck, Hajo Zeeb, Gudrun Laschewski, Carolin Hauer, Gunnar Wagner, Michael Max Sachse

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

7 authors.

Silke BöttcherLeibniz-Institut für Präventionsforschung und Epidemiologie-BIPS, Bremen, Germany boettcher@leibniz-bips.de.
Christoph BuckLeibniz-Institut für Präventionsforschung und Epidemiologie-BIPS, Bremen, Germany.
Hajo ZeebLeibniz-Institut für Präventionsforschung und Epidemiologie-BIPS, Bremen, Germany.
Gudrun LaschewskiDeutscher Wetterdienst, Freiburg, Germany.
Carolin HauerBremen Cancer Society, Bremen, Germany.
Gunnar WagnerDepartment of Dermatology, Allergology and Phlebology, Klinikum Bremerhaven Reinkenheide, Bremerhaven, Germany.
Michael Max SachseDepartment of Dermatology, Allergology and Phlebology, Klinikum Bremerhaven Reinkenheide, Bremerhaven, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo determine whether a multicomponent sun protection intervention programme (mHealth) for young organ transplant recipients (OTR) leads to a higher increase of preventive knowledge and behavioural change than an e-learning education programme (eHealth).

designRandomised controlled trial with one preintervention baseline survey and three follow-up surveys after 6 weeks, 6 and 12 months. Comparison of two different intervention schedules with a control group (CG).

settingMulticomponent sun protection trainings in Germany, the Netherlands and Austria between June 2013 and September 2015.

participants137 OTRs (5-22 years of age, 61 females/76 males) participated in the study.

interventions(A) Intervention group 1 (IG1): personal training with subsequent forwarding of individual ultraviolet index-dependent sun protection recommendations via short message service (SMS); (B) intervention group 2 (IG2): e-learning training without SMS; (C) CG: regular information letters, online training after 1 year. OUTCOME MEASURES: Key questions were used to form a knowledge and a behavioural score. Behavioural strategies and knowledge were quantified through self-administered questionnaires.

resultsAnalyses 6 weeks after the intervention showed a higher knowledge increase in both IG compared with the CG (IG1 to CG: OR 12.64, 95% CI 4.20 to 38.20; IG2 to CG: OR 2.59, 95% CI 0.95 to 7.04). Sun protection behaviour improved slightly but not significantly in both IG (IG1 to CG: OR 2.56, 95% CI 0.93 to 7.00; IG2 to CG: OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.45 to 3.32). One year after the intervention, no behavioural changes were observed in either IG compared with the CG. IG1 but not IG2 still scored significantly higher in sun protection knowledge than the CG 1 year after intervention (IG1 to CG: OR 4.46, 95% CI 1.48 to 13.43; IG2 to CG: OR 1.41, 95% CI 0.51 to 3.93).

conclusionsThis multicomponent sun protection programme provides a promising strategy to increase sun protection knowledge and possibly also protective behaviour in young OTR. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00011393.

Indexed as

Health BehaviorPatient Education as TopicTelemedicineText MessagingTransplant RecipientsAdolescentAustriaChildChild, PreschoolFemaleGermanyHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansImmunosuppressive AgentsLogistic ModelsMaleImmunosuppressive Agentsadolescentschildrenorgan transplantationSMSsun protection trainingUV light

Identifiers

PMID31848158
PMCPMC6937057

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.