Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32784175›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2020

Applying and Extending the FITT Framework to Identify the Challenges and Opportunities of Successful eHealth Services for Patient Self-Management: Qualitative Interview Study.

Sari Kujala, Elske Ammenwerth, Heta Kolanen, Minna Ervast

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 26 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Sari KujalaDepartment of Computer Science, Aalto University, Espoo, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-5586-3725
Elske AmmenwerthUMIT - Private University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Hall in Tirol, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-3244-6918
Heta KolanenHUS IT Management, HUS Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-7954-9271
Minna ErvastDevelopment Unit, Hospital District of South-West Finland, Turku, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-0587-0756

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe number of public eHealth services that support patient self-management is rapidly increasing. However, the implementation of these eHealth services for self-management has encountered challenges.

objectiveThe purpose of this paper was to analyze the challenges and opportunities of implementing eHealth services for self-management by focusing on the fit between the technical solution and clinical use.

methodsWe performed in-depth interviews with 10 clinical project coordinators and managers who were responsible for developing and implementing various eHealth services for self-management interventions in five university hospitals in Finland. The results were analyzed using content analysis and open coding. The Fit between Individuals, Task, and Technology (FITT) framework was used to interpret the findings.

resultsThe implementation of self-management services involved many challenges related to technical problems, health professional acceptance, patient motivation, and health organization and management. The implementers identified practices to manage the identified challenges, including improving the design of the technology, supporting health professionals in the adoption of the eHealth services, changing the work processes and tasks, involving patients, and collectively planning the implementation inside an organization. The findings could be mostly attributed to the dimensions of the FITT framework.

conclusionsThe FITT framework helped to analyze the challenges related to the implementation, and most of them were related to poor fit. The importance of patients as stakeholders in eHealth services for patient self-management needs to be highlighted. Thus, we propose that patients should be added as a different type of individual dimension to the FITT framework. In addition, the framework could be extended to include organization and management in a new context dimension.

Indexed as

FemaleHumansInterview, PsychologicalMaleQualitative ResearchSelf-ManagementTelemedicineadoptionimplementationintervieworganizationpatient self-management

Identifiers

PMID32784175
PMCPMC7450365

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.