Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33126506›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020

Acceptance and Potential Impact of the eWALL Platform for Health Monitoring and Promotion in Persons with a Chronic Disease or Age-Related Impairment.

Francesco Infarinato, Stephanie Jansen-Kosterink, Paola Romano, Lex van Velsen, Harm Op den Akker, Federica Rizza, Marco Ottaviani, Sofoklis Kyriazakos, Beatrix Wais-Zechmann, Markus Garschall and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Promoting Exercise Training Remotely.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  11. 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

12 authors.

Francesco InfarinatoIRCCS San Raffaele Pisana, 00166 Rome, Italy.
Stephanie Jansen-KosterinkRoessingh Research and Development, 7522 AH Enschede, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2095-7104
Paola RomanoIRCCS San Raffaele Pisana, 00166 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2441-135X
Lex van VelsenRoessingh Research and Development, 7522 AH Enschede, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0599-8706
Harm Op den AkkerRoessingh Research and Development, 7522 AH Enschede, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6312-6063
Federica RizzaIRCCS San Raffaele Pisana, 00166 Rome, Italy.
Marco OttavianiIRCCS San Raffaele Pisana, 00166 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6037-2960
Sofoklis KyriazakosDepartment of Business Development and Technology, BTECH, Aarhus University, 7400 Herning, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-8841-6558
Beatrix Wais-ZechmannAIT Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH, 1210 Wien, Austria.
Markus GarschallAIT Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH, 1210 Wien, Austria.
Stefano BonassiIRCCS San Raffaele Pisana, 00166 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3833-6717
Hermie J HermensRoessingh Research and Development, 7522 AH Enschede, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pervasive health technologies can increase the effectiveness of personal health monitoring and training, but more user studies are necessary to understand the interest for these technologies, and how they should be designed and implemented. In the present study, we evaluated eWALL, a user-centered pervasive health technology consisting of a platform that monitors users' physical and cognitive behavior, providing feedback and motivation via an easy-to-use, touch-based user interface. The eWALL was placed for one month in the home of 48 subjects with a chronic condition (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease-COPD or mild cognitive impairment-MCI) or with an age-related impairment. User acceptance, platform use, and potential clinical effects were evaluated using surveys, data logs, and clinical scales. Although some features of the platform need to be improved before reaching technical maturity and making a difference in patients' lives, the real-life evaluation of eWALL has shown how some features may influence patients' intention to use this promising technology. Furthermore, this study made it clear how the free use of different health apps is modulated by the real needs of the patient and by their usefulness in the context of the patient's clinical status.

Indexed as

Biomedical TechnologyCognitive DysfunctionPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveAgedAgingChronic DiseaseFemaleHealth PromotionHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesUser-Computer Interfaceacceptance of technologychronicityCOPDeHealthfrailtyhealth appsICT platformMCIpatient empowermentpervasive healthcaretelemonitoringtelerehabilitationuser experience

Identifiers

PMID33126506
PMCPMC7662387

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.