ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2020
Adoption and Attitudes of eHealth Among People Living With HIV and Their Physicians: Online Multicenter Questionnaire Study.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Providing 2 Types of mHealth Interventions to Support Self-Management Among People Living With HIV: Randomized Clinical Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2025Trial
- Acceptance of Men Living With HIV Toward Treatment-Supportive Mobile Apps Using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- User Engagement With a Mobile Health App for People Living With HIV: Observational Study Based on an Engagement Evaluation Framework.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Observational
- Access to dental care is still complex in 2022 for patients living with HIV despite the need for careful monitoring of pathologies of the oral mucosa. Results of a monocentric cross-sectional study in the Infectious Diseases Department of Clermont-Ferrand University Hospital.Clinical oral investigations · 2023Article
- Engaging Stigmatised Communities in Australia with Digital Health Systems: Towards Data Justice in Public Health.Sexuality research & social policy : journal of NSRC : SR & SP · 2023Article
- eHealth Communication With Clients at Community-Based HIV/AIDS Service Organizations in the Southern United States: Cross-Sectional Survey.JMIR formative research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe development of electronic health (eHealth) has offered the opportunity for remote care provision. eHealth addresses issues for patients and professionals favoring autonomy and compliance, respectively, while fostering closer links both between patients and health care professionals and among health care professionals themselves.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to analyze the patterns of use, benefits, and perceived obstacles in eHealth among people living with HIV (PLHIV) and their caring physicians at hospitals.
methodsAn online multicenter observational survey was conducted October 15-19, 2018 in 51 medical units across France by means of self-administered questionnaires to collect sociodemographic and medical data, and perceptions of eHealth. Multiple correspondence analysis followed by mixed unsupervised classification were performed to analyze data of the respondents.
resultsA total of 279 PLHIV and 219 physicians responded to all parts of the questionnaire. Three groups of PLHIV were identified based on multivariate analysis. Group 1 comprised "eHealth believers" (121/279, 43.4%), who were more frequently above 60 years old and more likely to be receiving treatments other than antiretrovirals. Group 2, the "technology skeptics" (86/279, 30.8%), comprised more women with at least one child. Group 3, the "internet adopters" (72/279, 25.8%), were more frequently under 49 years of age, men who have sex with men, and more likely to use mobile apps for obtaining wellness/health information and related subjects. Three groups of physicians also emerged. Group 1 comprised those "strongly confident in eHealth" (95/219, 43.4%), who more frequently used mobile apps for wellness/health information and were more likely to accept prescription assistance software. Group 2 comprised physicians "strongly opposed to eHealth" (80/219, 36.5%), frequently asserting that eHealth challenges confidentiality. Group 3 were "open to eHealth" (44/219, 20.1%), comprising a higher proportion of infectious disease specialists, and were more likely to believe that medical apps are useful for patient education and information. No link was found between the groups of PLHIV and physicians.
conclusionsThe literature on eHealth mainly classifies people as enthusiasts and skeptics; however, we identified a third profile among both PLHIV and physicians, albeit without a direct link between them. For PLHIV, this third group is attentive to eHealth for improving their health condition, and for physicians, this group considers eHealth to offer benefits to patients and their own practice.
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.