Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32554377›Full record

ArticleJMIR aging2020

Clinician Perspectives on the Design and Application of Wearable Cardiac Technologies for Older Adults: Qualitative Study.

Caleb Ferguson, Sally C Inglis, Paul P Breen, Gaetano D Gargiulo, Victoria Byiers, Peter S Macdonald, Louise D Hickman

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR aging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 46% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Caleb Ferguson *Western Sydney Nursing & Midwifery Research Centre, Western Sydney Local Health District and Western Sydney University, Blacktown, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2417-2216
Sally C InglisIMPACCT, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1331-5912
Paul P BreenMARCS Institute for Brain, Behaviour and Development, Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8860-2086
Gaetano D GargiuloMARCS Institute for Brain, Behaviour and Development, Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2616-2804
Victoria ByiersThe Sutherland Hospital, South Eastern Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6743-6093
Peter S MacdonaldVictor Chang Cardiac Research Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5378-2825
Louise D HickmanIMPACCT, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5116-6559
University of Technology Sydney · AUWestern Sydney University · AUSutherland Hospital · AUSydney Local Health District · AUVictor Chang Cardiac Research Institute · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNew wearable devices (for example, AliveCor or Zio patch) offer promise in detecting arrhythmia and monitoring cardiac health status, among other clinically useful parameters in older adults. However, the clinical utility and usability from the perspectives of clinicians is largely unexplored.

objectiveThis study aimed to explore clinician perspectives on the use of wearable cardiac monitoring technology for older adults.

methodsA descriptive qualitative study was conducted using semistructured focus group interviews. Clinicians were recruited through purposive sampling of physicians, nurses, and allied health staff working in 3 tertiary-level hospitals. Verbatim transcripts were analyzed using thematic content analysis to identify themes.

resultsClinicians representing physicians, nurses, and allied health staff working in 3 tertiary-level hospitals completed 4 focus group interviews between May 2019 and July 2019. There were 50 participants (28 men and 22 women), including cardiologists, geriatricians, nurses, and allied health staff. The focus groups generated the following 3 overarching, interrelated themes: (1) the current state of play, understanding the perceived challenges of patient cardiac monitoring in hospitals, (2) priorities in cardiac monitoring, what parameters new technologies should measure, and (3) cardiac monitoring of the future, "the ideal device."

conclusionsThere remain pitfalls related to the design of wearable cardiac technology for older adults that present clinical challenges. These pitfalls and challenges likely negatively impact the uptake of wearable cardiac monitoring in routine clinical care. Partnering with clinicians and patients in the co-design of new wearable cardiac monitoring technologies is critical to optimize the use of these devices and their uptake in clinical care.

Indexed as

arrhythmiacardiologymonitoringolder peoplequalitativetechnologywearable

Identifiers

PMID32554377
PMCPMC7333070
OpenAlexW3017274347

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.