ArticlePloS one2020
Consumer preference to utilise a mobile health app: A stated preference experiment.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Effect and Safety of App-Based Interventions for Populations With Osteoarthritis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2025Pooled it
- Public preferences for primary healthcare services in Hong Kong: a discrete choice experiment.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Navigation, Adoption, and Use of Digital Health Technologies for Irritable Bowel Syndrome Self-Management: Focus Group Study of Patient Experience and Decision-Making.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Piloting Digital Navigators to Promote Acceptance and Engagement With Digital Mental Health Apps in German Outpatient Care: Protocol for a Multicenter, Single-Group, Observational, Mixed Methods Interventional Study (DigiNavi).JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- A choice based conjoint analysis of mobile healthcare application preferences among physicians, patients, and individuals.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Exploring user experience: A qualitative analysis of the use of a physical activity support app for people with heart failure.PloS one · 2025Article
- Interest in mHealth Among Patients With Low Back Pain: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR human factors · 2024Article
- Smartphone videos of the sit-to-stand test predict osteoarthritis and health outcomes in a nationwide study.NPJ digital medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Travel changes and equitable access to urban parks in the post COVID-19 pandemic period: Evidence from Wuhan, China.Journal of environmental management · 2022Article
- Adoption of the Website and Mobile App of a Preventive Health Program Across Neighborhoods With Different Socioeconomic Conditions in the Netherlands: Longitudinal Study.JMIR human factors · 2022Article
- Scoping review: Development and assessment of evaluation frameworks of mobile health apps for recommendations to consumers.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Article
- Insights into mobile health application market via a content analysis of marketplace data with machine learning.PloS one · 2021Article
- Understanding digital health ecosystem from Australian citizens' perspective: A scoping review.PloS one · 2021Article
- The use and acceptability of diet-related apps and websites in Australia: Cross-sectional study.Digital healthArticle
- Implementation of a mobile application for outpatient care after liver transplantation.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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOne prominent barrier faced by healthcare consumers when accessing health services is a common requirement to complete repetitive, inefficient paper-based documentation at multiple registration sites. Digital innovation has a potential role to reduce the burden in this area, through the collection and sharing of data between healthcare providers. While there is growing evidence for digital innovations to potentially improve the effectiveness and efficiency of health systems, there is less information on the willingness of healthcare consumers to embrace and utilise technology to provide data.
aimThe study aims to improve understanding of consumers' preference for utilising a digital health administration mobile app.
methodsThe online study used a stated preference experiment design to explore aspects of consumers' preference for a mobile health administration app and its impact on the likelihood of using the app. The survey was answered by a representative sample (by age and gender) of Australian adults, and sociodemographic factors were also recorded for analysis. Each participant answered eight choice sets in which a hypothetical app (defined by a set of dimensions and levels) was presented and the respondent was asked if they would be willing to provide data using that app. Analysis was conducted using bivariate logistic regression.
resultsFor the average respondent, the two most important dimensions were the time it took to register on the app and the electronic governance arrangements around their personal information. Willingness to use any app was found to differ based on respondent characteristics: people with higher education, and women, were relatively more willing to utilise the mobile health app.
conclusionThis study investigated consumers' willingness to utilise a digital health administration mobile app. The identification of key characteristics of more acceptable apps provide valuable insight and recommendations for developers of similar digital health administration technologies. This would increase the likelihood of achieving successful acceptance and utilisation by consumers. The results from this study provide evidence-based recommendations for future research and policy development, planning and implementation of digital health administration mobile applications in Australia.
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.