Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33170133›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2020

Patient Perception of Mobile Phone Apps for the Care and Prevention of Sexually Transmitted Diseases: Cross-Sectional Study.

Lena Jakob, Theresa Steeb, Zeno Fiocco, Teodora Pumnea, Sophia Nomi Jakob, Anja Wessely, Christoph Clemens Rothenberger, Titus Josef Brinker, Lars Einar French, Carola Berking and 1 more

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

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. A systematic review of eHealth modes in preventing sexually transmitted infections.Indian journal of sexually transmitted diseases and AIDS
    Review
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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Lena JakobDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital Munich, Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9832-7586
Theresa SteebDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital Munich, Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9008-0088
Zeno FioccoDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital Munich, Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8508-6189
Teodora PumneaDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital Munich, Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2596-8088
Sophia Nomi JakobArbeitsstelle für Diagnostik und Evaluation, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0647-2274
Anja WesselyDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital Munich, Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1940-5115
Christoph Clemens RothenbergerDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital Munich, Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6055-3577
Titus Josef BrinkerNational Center for Tumor Diseases, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3620-5919
Lars Einar FrenchDepartment of Dermatology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4629-1486
Carola BerkingDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital Munich, Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0229-8931
Markus Vincent HepptDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital Munich, Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4603-1825
Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg · DELudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEGerman Cancer Research Center · DEGoethe University Frankfurt · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the emerging era of digitalization and electronic health, various health-related apps have been launched, including apps for sexually transmitted diseases. Until now, little has been known about how patients perceive the value of such apps.

objectiveTo investigate patient's attitudes and awareness toward sexually transmitted disease-related apps in an outpatient sexually transmitted disease clinic setting.

methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted at a dermatovenereological outpatient unit between April and July 2019. Patients completed a self-administered questionnaire on their perceptions of the popularity and usefulness of sexually transmitted disease-related apps. Descriptive analysis was performed with expression of categorical variables as frequencies and percentages. For continuous variables, the median, range, and interquartile range were indicated. Contingency tables and chi-square tests were used to investigate associations between sociodemographic data and items of the questionnaire.

resultsA total of 226 patients were surveyed (heterosexual: 137/193, 71.0%; homosexual: 44/193, 22.8%; bisexual: 12/193, 6.2%); 11.9% (27/225) had previously used health-related apps. Nearly half of the patients (97/214, 45.3%) specifically considered sexually transmitted disease-related apps useful, 47.8% (100/209) voted that they could supplement or support the consultation of a physician. Interestingly, only 35.1% (74/211) preferred a printed patient brochure on sexually transmitted diseases over downloading and using an app, but 64.0% (134/209) would download a sexually transmitted disease-related app recommended by their physician. General information regarding sexually transmitted diseases (93/167, 55.7%), evaluation of skin diseases based on photos or videos (78/167, 53.3%), information on the prevention of sexually transmitted diseases (76/167, 45.5%), mediation of nearby contact points or test sites (74/167, 44.3%), anonymous medical advice (69/167, 41.3%), and calculation of the risk of having a sexually transmitted disease (63/167, 37.3%) were rated as the most important features. Men were more likely than women to find sexually transmitted disease-related apps useful in general (P=.04; χ

conclusionsThis study demonstrated high general interest in the use of sexually transmitted disease-related apps in this sample of dermatovenereological outpatients. In particular, young age and male sex were significantly associated with a positive perception, underlining the high potential of apps in the prevention and early recognition of sexually transmitted diseases in this group. Future studies are warranted to validate these findings in other populations.

Indexed as

Cell PhoneMobile ApplicationsSexually Transmitted DiseasesAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMalePerceptionhealth appsmobile phone appssexually transmitted diseasessexually transmitted infection

Identifiers

PMID33170133
PMCPMC7685917
OpenAlexW3083541674

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.