ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2021
Prescribing Smartphone Apps for Physical Activity Promotion in Primary Care: Modeling Study of Health Gain and Cost Savings.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Digital Therapeutics in Cardiovascular Healthcare: A Narrative Review.Current cardiology reports · 2025Review
- Sensor-Derived Measures of Motor and Cognitive Functions in People With Multiple Sclerosis Using Unsupervised Smartphone-Based Assessments: Proof-of-Concept Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Influence of smartphone-based physical activity intervention on executive functions and cardiometabolic disease risk in obese young adults: a pilot randomised controlled trial.Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders · 2023Article
- Prioritization of intervention domains to prevent cardiovascular disease: a country-level case study using global burden of disease and local data.Population health metrics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInadequate physical activity is a substantial cause of health loss worldwide, and this loss is attributable to diseases such as coronary heart disease, diabetes, stroke, and certain forms of cancer.
objectiveThis study aims to assess the potential impact of the prescription of smartphone apps in primary care settings on physical activity levels, health gains (in quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]), and health system costs in New Zealand (NZ).
methodsA proportional multistate lifetable model was used to estimate the change in physical activity levels and predict the resultant health gains in QALYs and health system costs over the remaining life span of the NZ population alive in 2011 at a 3% discount rate.
resultsThe modeled intervention resulted in an estimated 430 QALYs gained (95% uncertainty interval 320-550), with net cost savings of 2011 NZ $2.2 million (2011 US $1.5 million) over the remaining life span of the 2011 NZ population. On a per capita basis, QALY gains were generally larger in women than in men and larger in Māori than in non-Māori. The health impact and cost-effectiveness of the intervention were highly sensitive to assumptions on intervention uptake and decay. For example, the scenario analysis with the largest benefits, which assumed a 5-year maintenance of additional physical activity levels, delivered 1750 QALYs and 2011 NZ $22.5 million (2011 US $15.1 million) in cost savings.
conclusionsThe prescription of smartphone apps for promoting physical activity in primary care settings is likely to generate modest health gains and cost savings at the population level in this high-income country. Such gains may increase with ongoing improvements in app design and increased health worker promotion of the apps to patients.
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.