Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34914612›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2021

A Digital Platform to Support Self-management of Multiple Chronic Conditions (ProACT): Findings in Relation to Engagement During a One-Year Proof-of-Concept Trial.

Julie Doyle, Emma Murphy, Shane Gavin, Alessandra Pascale, Stéphane Deparis, Pierpaolo Tommasi, Suzanne Smith, Caoimhe Hannigan, Myriam Sillevis Smitt, Cora van Leeuwen and 9 more

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report 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 50 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
8.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 88 citations in OpenAlex.

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

19 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Julie DoyleNetwellCASALA, Dundalk Institute of Technology, Dundalk, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0003-4017-6329
Emma MurphyTrinity Centre for Practice and Healthcare Innovation, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-6738-3067
Shane GavinNetwellCASALA, Dundalk Institute of Technology, Dundalk, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-4604-9067
Alessandra PascaleIBM Research Europe, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0003-4448-2024
Stéphane DeparisIBM Research Europe, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0003-1587-5902
Pierpaolo TommasiIBM Research Europe, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-5975-1533
Suzanne SmithNetwellCASALA, Dundalk Institute of Technology, Dundalk, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-8486-7087
Caoimhe HanniganTrinity Centre for Practice and Healthcare Innovation, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-8911-2655
Myriam Sillevis SmittImec-VUB-SMIT, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-4566-8114
Cora van LeeuwenImec-VUB-SMIT, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-3536-5881
Julia LastraTree Technology, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-6786-6269
Mary GalvinTrinity Centre for Practice and Healthcare Innovation, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-9367-620X
Patricia McAleerNetwellCASALA, Dundalk Institute of Technology, Dundalk, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-5580-9024
Lorraine TompkinsTrinity Centre for Practice and Healthcare Innovation, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-9524-5312
An JacobsImec-VUB-SMIT, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-8058-1455
Marta M MarquesTrinity Centre for Practice and Healthcare Innovation, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-4797-9557
Jaime Medina MaestroTree Technology, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-9921-1112
Gordon BoyleNetwellCASALA, Dundalk Institute of Technology, Dundalk, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-4501-7469
John DinsmoreTrinity Centre for Practice and Healthcare Innovation, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-8387-3496
Dundalk Institute of Technology · IETrinity College Dublin · IEIBM Research - Ireland · IEIMEC · BETreelogic (Spain) · ESNational University of Ireland · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPopulations globally are ageing, resulting in higher incidence rates of chronic diseases. Digital health platforms, designed to support those with chronic conditions to self-manage at home, offer a promising solution to help people monitor their conditions and lifestyle, maintain good health, and reduce unscheduled clinical visits. However, despite high prevalence rates of multimorbidity or multiple chronic conditions, most platforms tend to focus on a single disease. A further challenge is that despite the importance of users actively engaging with such systems, little research has explored engagement.

objectiveThe objectives of this study are to design and develop a digital health platform, ProACT, for facilitating older adults self-managing multimorbidity, with support from their care network, and evaluate end user engagement and experiences with this platform through a 12-month trial.

methodsThe ProACT digital health platform is presented in this paper. The platform was evaluated in a year-long proof-of-concept action research trial with 120 older persons with multimorbidity in Ireland and Belgium. Alongside the technology, participants had access to a clinical triage service responding to symptom alerts and a technical helpdesk. Interactions with the platform during the trial were logged to determine engagement. Semistructured interviews were conducted with participants and analyzed using inductive thematic analysis, whereas usability and user burden were examined using validated questionnaires.

resultsThis paper presents the ProACT platform and its components, along with findings on engagement with the platform and its usability. Of the 120 participants who participated, 24 (20%) withdrew before the end of the study, whereas 3 (2.5%) died. The remaining 93 participants actively used the platform until the end of the trial, on average, taking 2 or 3 health readings daily over the course of the trial in Ireland and Belgium, respectively. The participants reported ProACT to be usable and of low burden. Findings from interviews revealed that participants experienced multiple benefits as a result of using ProACT, including improved self-management, health, and well-being and support from the triage service. For those who withdrew, barriers to engagement were poor health and frustration when technology, in particular sensing devices, did not work as expected.

conclusionsThis is the first study to present findings from a longitudinal study of older adults using digital health technology to self-manage multimorbidity. Our findings show that older adults sustained engagement with the technology and found it usable. Potential reasons for these results include a strong focus on user-centered design and engagement throughout the project lifecycle, resulting in a platform that meets user needs, as well as the integration of behavior change techniques and personal analytics into the platform. The provision of triage and technical support services alongside the platform during the trial were also important facilitators of engagement. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/22125.

Indexed as

Multiple Chronic ConditionsSelf-ManagementAgedAged, 80 and overBelgiumHumansIrelandLongitudinal Studiesagingchronic diseasedigital healthengagementintegrated carelongitudinal studymobile phonemultimorbidityself-managementusability

Identifiers

PMID34914612
PMCPMC8717138
OpenAlexW3170290318

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.