ArticleJMIR formative research2019
Understanding End-User Perspectives of Mobile Pulmonary Rehabilitation (mPR): Cross-Sectional Survey and Interviews.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Experiences of Home-Based Pulmonary Rehabilitation With mHealth and Centre-Based Pulmonary Rehabilitation in People With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Qualitative Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Trial
- The Impact of Patient Preference on Attendance and Completion Rates at Centre-Based and mHealth Pulmonary Rehabilitation: A Non-Inferiority Pragmatic Clinical Trial.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2023Trial
- Development and Preliminary Evaluation of the Effects of an mHealth Web-Based Platform (HappyAir) on Adherence to a Maintenance Program After Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2020Trial
- Integrating remote patient monitoring into pulmonary rehabilitation: a feasibility randomised controlled trial.ERJ open research · 2026Article
- Factors that influence the provision of home-based rehabilitation services for people needing rehabilitation: a qualitative evidence synthesis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Review
- Adapting an Evidence-Based e-Learning Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Program Into a Mobile App for People Experiencing Gambling-Related Problems: Formative Study.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- Telerehabilitation for Lung Transplant Candidates and Recipients During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Program Evaluation.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2021Article
- Bridging the gap between respiratory research and health literacy: an interactive web-based platform.BMJ simulation & technology enhanced learning · 2021Article
- Time to listen: a mixed-method study examining community-based views of mobile technology for interventions to promote physical activity.BMJ health & care informatics · 2020Article
- Acceptability of a digital pulmonary rehabilitation app as an adjunct or alternative to usual care for people with chronic lung diseases: A qualitative study of patients' views and experiences.Chronic respiratory diseaseArticle
- Review
- Competencies required by patients and health professionals regarding telerehabilitation: A scoping review.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is an effective intervention for the management of people with chronic respiratory diseases, but the uptake of and adherence to PR programs is low. There is potential for mobile health (mHealth) to provide an alternative modality for the delivery of PR, overcoming many of the barriers contributing to poor attendance to current services.
objectiveThe objective of this study was to understand the needs, preferences, and priorities of end users for the development of an adaptive mobile PR (mPR) support program.
methodsA mixed methods (qualitative and quantitative) approach was used to assess the needs, preferences, and priorities of the end users (ie, patients with chronic respiratory disorders) and key stakeholders (ie, clinicians working with patients with chronic respiratory disorders and running PR). The formative studies included the following: (1) a survey to understand the preferences and priorities of patients for PR and how mobile technology could be used to provide PR support, (2) ethnographic semistructured interviews with patients with chronic respiratory disorders to gain perspectives on their understanding of their health and potential features that could be included in an mPR program, and (3) key informant interviews with health care providers to understand the needs, preferences, and priorities for the development of an mPR support program.
resultsAcross all formative studies (patient survey, n=30; patient interviews, n=8; and key stakeholder interviews, n=8), the participants were positive about the idea of an mPR program but raised concerns related to digital literacy and confidence in using technology, access to technology, and loss of social support currently gained from traditional programs. Key stakeholders highlighted the need for patient safety to be maintained and ensuring appropriate programs for different groups within the population. Finding a balance between ensuring safety and maximizing access was seen to be essential in the success of an mPR program.
conclusionsThese formative studies found high interest in mHealth-based PR intervention and detailed the potential for an mPR program to overcome current barriers to accessing traditional PR programs. Key considerations and features were identified, including the importance of technology access and digital literacy being considered in utilizing technology with this population.
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.