Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33052134›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2020

Challenges in Acceptance and Compliance in Digital Health Assessments During Pregnancy: Prospective Cohort Study.

Katharina Brusniak, Hannah Maria Arndt, Manuel Feisst, Kathrin Haßdenteufel, Lina Maria Matthies, Thomas Maximilian Deutsch, Hannes Hudalla, Harald Abele, Markus Wallwiener, Stephanie Wallwiener

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Feasibility and user acceptability of BreezingSmart health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2023
    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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Katharina Brusniak *Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2005-9432
Hannah Maria Arndt *Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4031-5686
Manuel FeisstInstitute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5016-9731
Kathrin HaßdenteufelDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0141-7425
Lina Maria MatthiesDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9754-0844
Thomas Maximilian DeutschDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0621-1290
Hannes HudallaDepartment of Neonatology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9205-0114
Harald AbeleDepartment of Women's Health, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0429-7118
Markus WallwienerDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4139-9340
Stephanie WallwienerDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2045-650X
Heidelberg University · DEUniversity Children's Hospital Tübingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPregnant women are increasingly using mobile apps to access health information during the antenatal period. Therefore, digital health solutions can potentially be used as monitoring instruments during pregnancy. However, a main factor of success is high user engagement.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to analyze engagement and factors influencing compliance in a longitudinal study targeting pregnant women using a digital health app with self-tracking.

methodsDigitally collected data concerning demographics, medical history, technical aspects, and mental health from 585 pregnant women were analyzed. Patients filling out ≥80% of items at every study visit were considered to be highly compliant. Factors associated with high compliance were identified using logistic regression. The effect of a change in mental and physical well-being on compliance was assessed using a one-sample t test.

resultsOnly 25% of patients could be considered compliant. Overall, 63% left at least one visit blank. Influential variables for higher engagement included higher education, higher income, private health insurance, nonsmoking, and German origin. There was no relationship between a change in the number of physical complaints or depressive symptoms and study dropout.

conclusionsMaintaining high engagement with digital monitoring devices over a long time remains challenging. As cultural and socioeconomic background factors had the strongest influence, more effort needs to be directed toward understanding the needs of patients from different demographic backgrounds to ensure high-quality care for all patients. More studies need to report on compliance to disclose potential demographic bias.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesPatient CompliancePregnancyPregnant PeopleProspective Studiescompliancedigital assessmentseHealthpregnancy

Identifiers

PMID33052134
PMCPMC7593860
OpenAlexW3048923369

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.