SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2020
Usage Metrics of Web-Based Interventions Evaluated in Randomized Controlled Trials: Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effectiveness of eHealth Interventions on Health Outcomes in Adult Patients With Intestinal Stoma: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.International journal of nursing practice · 2026Pooled it
- User engagement in clinical trials of digital mental health interventions: a systematic review.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Pooled it
- User journey method: a case study for improving digital intervention use measurement.BMC health services research · 2025Trial
- Feasibility and acceptability of tailored sexual assault prevention in the US Air Force.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2024Article
- Research Into Digital Health Intervention for Mental Health: 25-Year Retrospective on the Ethical and Legal Challenges.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Evaluation of different landing pages on behavioural engagement with the CARA dashboard: A user research protocol.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Feasibility and preliminary efficacy of iConquerFear: a self-guided digital intervention for fear of cancer recurrence.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2024Article
- Real-World User Demographics of Three Web-Based Digital Mental Health Interventions Provided by the US Department of Veterans Affairs: Observational Study Using Web Analytics Data.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Web based research in sexual medicine: a position statement of the European Society for Sexual Medicine.Sexual medicine · 2023Review
- Human Enough: A Qualitative Study of Client Experience With Internet-Based Access to Pre-exposure Prophylaxis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Development, Implementation and First Evaluation of an Online Portal to Promote the Mental Health of University Students (me@JGU).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Effectiveness of a kindergarten-based intervention to increase vegetable intake and reduce food neophobia amongst 1-year-old children: a cluster randomised controlled trial.Food & nutrition research · 2021Article
- Article
- Mobile Breast Cancer e-Support Program for Chinese Women With Breast Cancer Undergoing Chemotherapy (Part 3): Secondary Data Analysis.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2020Article
- Review
- An Evaluation of 5-Year Web Analytics for HeadsUpGuys: A Men's Depression E-Mental Health Resource.American journal of men's 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe evaluation of web-based interventions (defined as an intervention that can be downloaded or accessed on the internet through a web browser) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) has increased over the past two decades. Little is known about how participants' use of the intervention is measured, reported, and analyzed in these studies.
objectiveThis study aimed to review the evaluation of web-based interventions in RCTs, assessing study characteristics and the methods used to record, and adjust for, intervention usage.
methodsA systematic review of the literature was undertaken to identify all published reports of RCTs that involved a web-based intervention. A random sample of 100 published trials was selected for detailed data extraction. Information on trial characteristics was extracted, including whether web usage data were recorded, and if so, the methods used to gather these data and whether these data were used to inform efficacy analyses.
resultsA PubMed search identified 812 trials of web-based interventions published up to the end of 2017 and demonstrated a growing trend over time. Of the 100 studies reviewed, 90 studies collected web usage data, but more than half (49/90, 54%) of these studies did not state the method used for recording web usage. Only four studies attempted to check on the reliability of their web usage data collection methods. A total of 39% (35/90) studies reported patterns or levels of web intervention use, of which 21% (19/90) studies adjusted for intervention use in their outcome analysis, but only two of these used appropriate statistical methods.
conclusionsTrialists frequently report a measure of web-based intervention usage but do not always report the collection method or provide enough detail on their analysis of web usage. Appropriate statistical methods to account for intervention use are rarely used and are not well reported even in the very few trials in which they are used. The number of trialists who attempt to check on the reliability of their web usage collection methods is extremely low.
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.