Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33559338›Full record

Trial reportArthritis & rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.)2021

Outcomes of a Mobile App to Monitor Patient-Reported Outcomes in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Yvonne C Lee, Fengxin Lu, Joshua Colls, Dee Luo, Penny Wang, Dorothy D Dunlop, Lutfiyya N Muhammad, Jing Song, Kaleb Michaud, Daniel H Solomon

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Arthritis & rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  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

10 authors.

Yvonne C LeeNorthwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.ORCID 0000-0002-2105-3393
Fengxin LuBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Joshua CollsBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Dee LuoBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Penny WangBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Dorothy D DunlopNorthwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Lutfiyya N MuhammadNorthwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Jing SongNorthwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Kaleb MichaudUniversity of Nebraska, Omaha, and FORWARD-The National Databank for Rheumatic Diseases, Wichita, Kansas.ORCID 0000-0002-5350-3934
Daniel H SolomonBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.ORCID 0000-0001-8202-5428

Funding

Resource CoreP30AR072579 · NIAMS · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI Leena Sharma · 2017 to 2026
$8.3M
Northwestern University Clinical and Translational Science Institute (NUCATS)KL2TR001424 · NCATS · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI SHARMA, LEENA · 2015 to 2023
$8.1M
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR001424NIAMS NIH HHS P30 AR072579
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo examine the effects of a smartphone application (app) to monitor longitudinal electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) on patient satisfaction and disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

methodsWe conducted a 6-month randomized controlled trial of care coordination along with an app (intervention) versus care coordination alone (control) in 191 RA patients. Participants in the intervention group were prompted to provide information daily using ePROs. In both the intervention and control groups, a care coordinator contacted participants at 6 and 18 weeks to assess for flares. The main outcome measures were the global satisfaction score from the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM), the score from the Perceived Efficacy in Patient-Physician Interactions (PEPPI) Questionnaire, and the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score.

resultsGroups were similar at baseline. The median TSQM score at 6 months was 83.3 in both groups, and the median PEPPI score at 6 months was 50 in both groups. The median CDAI score at 6 months was 8 in the intervention group versus 10 in the control group. No statistically significant group differences in the medians of TSQM, PEPPI, or CDAI scores at 6 months were detected. Of the 67 intervention participants who completed the exit survey, 90% rated their likelihood of recommending the app as ≥7 of 10. Of the 11 physicians who completed the exit survey, 73% agreed/strongly agreed that they wanted to continue offering the app to patients.

conclusionA mobile app designed to collect ePRO data on RA symptoms did not significantly improve patient satisfaction or disease activity compared to care coordination alone. However, both patients and physicians reported positive experiences with the app.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsAgedArthritis, RheumatoidFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient Care ManagementPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPatient SatisfactionSeverity of Illness IndexSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID33559338
PMCPMC8330418

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.