ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2021
Multiple Sclerosis Progression Discussion Tool Usability and Usefulness in Clinical Practice: Cross-sectional, Web-Based Survey.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Scoping review of clinical decision support systems for multiple sclerosis management: Leveraging information technology and massive health data.European journal of neurology · 2025Article
- A Clinical Care Algorithm for Detecting Progression in Multiple Sclerosis: RetratEMos Project.Cureus · 2024Article
- Data on Ocrelizumab Treatment Collected by MS Patients in Germany Using Brisa App.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- VISIBL-MS: A bilingual educational framework to increase awareness of early multiple sclerosis.Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England) · 2024Review
- Enhancing Nurse-Robot Engagement: Two-Wave Survey Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Treatment of Patients with Multiple Sclerosis Transitioning Between Relapsing and Progressive Disease.CNS drugs · 2023Review
- MSProDiscuss™ Clinical Decision Support Tool for Identifying Multiple Sclerosis Progression.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- The need for a strategic therapeutic approach: multiple sclerosis in check.Therapeutic advances in chronic disease · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 13 institutions in 9 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA digital tool, Multiple Sclerosis Progression Discussion Tool (MSProDiscuss), was developed to facilitate discussions between health care professionals (HCPs) and patients in evaluating early, subtle signs of multiple sclerosis (MS) disease progression.
objectiveThe aim of this study is to report the findings on the usability and usefulness of MSProDiscuss in a real-world clinical setting.
methodsIn this cross-sectional, web-based survey, HCPs across 34 countries completed an initial individual questionnaire (comprising 7 questions on comprehensibility, usability, and usefulness after using MSProDiscuss during each patient consultation) and a final questionnaire (comprising 13 questions on comprehensibility, usability, usefulness, and integration and adoption into clinical practice to capture the HCPs' overall experience of using the tool). The responses were provided on a 5-point Likert scale. All analyses were descriptive, and no statistical comparisons were made.
resultsIn total, 301 HCPs tested the tool in 6974 people with MS, of whom 77% (5370/6974) had relapsing-remitting MS, including those suspected to be transitioning to secondary progressive MS. The time taken to complete MSProDiscuss was reported to be in the range of 1 to 4 minutes in 97.3% (6786/6974; initial) to 98.2% (269/274; final) of the cases. In 93.54% (6524/6974; initial) to 97.1% (266/274; final) of the cases, the HCPs agreed (4 or 5 on the Likert scale) that patients were able to comprehend the questions in the tool. The HCPs were willing to use the tool again in the same patient, 90.47% (6310/6974; initial) of the cases. The HCPs reported MSProDiscuss to be useful in discussing MS symptoms and their impact on daily activities (6121/6974, 87.76% initial and 252/274, 92% final) and cognitive function (5482/6974, 78.61% initial and 271/274, 79.2% final), as well as in discussing progression in general (6102/6974, 87.49% initial and 246/274, 89.8% final). While completing the final questionnaire, 94.9% (260/274) of the HCPs agreed that the questions were similar to those asked in regular consultation, and the tool helped to better understand the impact of MS symptoms on daily activities (249/274, 90.9%) and cognitive function (220/274, 80.3%). Overall, 92% (252/274) of the HCPs reported that they would recommend MSProDiscuss to a colleague, and 85.8% (235/274) were willing to integrate it into their clinical practice.
conclusionsMSProDiscuss is a usable and useful tool to facilitate a physician-patient discussion on MS disease progression in daily clinical practice. Most of the HCPs agreed that the tool is easy to use and were willing to integrate MSProDiscuss into their daily clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.