Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31961333›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2020

Testing Consultation Recordings in a Clinical Setting With the SecondEars Smartphone App: Mixed Methods Implementation Study.

Amelia Hyatt, Ruby Lipson-Smith, Bryce Morkunas, Meinir Krishnasamy, Michael Jefford, Kathryn Baxter, Karla Gough, Declan Murphy, Allison Drosdowsky, Jo Phipps-Nelson and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

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

15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Amelia HyattCancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2322-7817
Ruby Lipson-SmithCancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1702-8144
Bryce MorkunasCancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0199-9878
Meinir KrishnasamyCancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3050-4213
Michael JeffordCancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8792-7807
Kathryn BaxterHealth Information Management, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4315-036X
Karla GoughCancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2819-4217
Declan MurphySir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7500-5899
Allison DrosdowskyCancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5346-3277
Jo Phipps-NelsonCancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0326-7822
Fiona WhiteCancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7696-0871
Alan WhiteCancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1547-8827
Lesley SerongCancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6347-839X
Geraldine McDonaldPrevention and Wellbeing, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4417-2974
Donna MilneCancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9874-2023
Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AUThe University of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth care systems are increasingly looking to mobile device technologies (mobile health) to improve patient experience and health outcomes. SecondEars is a smartphone app designed to allow patients to audio-record medical consultations to improve recall, understanding, and health care self-management. Novel health interventions such as SecondEars often fail to be implemented post pilot-testing owing to inadequate user experience (UX) assessment, a key component of a comprehensive implementation strategy.

objectiveThis study aimed to pilot the SecondEars app within an active clinical setting to identify factors necessary for optimal implementation. Objectives were to (1) investigate patient UX and acceptability, utility, and satisfaction with the SecondEars app, and (2) understand health professional perspectives on issues, solutions, and strategies for effective implementation of SecondEars.

methodsA mixed methods implementation study was employed. Patients were invited to test the app to record consultations with participating oncology health professionals. Follow-up interviews were conducted with all participating patients (or carers) and health professionals, regarding uptake and extent of app use. Responses to the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) were also collected. Interviews were analyzed using interpretive descriptive methodology; all quantitative data were analyzed descriptively.

resultsA total of 24 patients used SecondEars to record consultations with 10 multidisciplinary health professionals. In all, 22 of these patients used SecondEars to listen to all or part of the recording, either alone or with family. All 100% of patient participants reported in the MARS that they would use SecondEars again and recommend it to others. A total of 3 themes were identified from the patient interviews relating to the UX of SecondEars: empowerment, facilitating support in cancer care, and usability. Further, 5 themes were identified from the health professional interviews relating to implementation of SecondEars: changing hospital culture, mitigating medico-legal concerns, improving patient care, communication, and practical implementation solutions.

conclusionsData collected during pilot testing regarding recording use, UX, and health professional and patient perspectives will be important for designing an effective implementation strategy for SecondEars. Those testing the app found it useful and felt that it could facilitate the benefits of consultation recordings, along with providing patient empowerment and support. Potential issues regarding implementation were discussed, and solutions were generated.

trial registrationAustralia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12618000730202; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=373915&isClinicalTrial=False.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsMultimediaAustraliaFemaleHumansMaleNew ZealandReferral and ConsultationSmartphonecancerconsultation audio recordingimplementationmHealthmobile appspilot

Identifiers

PMID31961333
PMCPMC7001044
OpenAlexW2980577245

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.