Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35646382›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Patient and physician perspectives on the use and outcome measures of mHealth apps: Exploratory survey and focus group study.

Rita Jezrawi, Sarmini Balakumar, Rafia Masud, Itzhak Gabizon, Vinai Bhagirath, Jobin Varughese, Michael Brown, Dan Trottier, J D Schwalm, Michael McGillion and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

12 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Rita JezrawiDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0013-7643
Sarmini BalakumarInstitute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Rafia MasudDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Itzhak GabizonDepartment of Cardiology, Soroka University Medical Center, University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel.
Vinai BhagirathDepartment of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Jobin VarugheseDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Michael BrownDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Dan TrottierPopulation Health Research Institute, Hamilton Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
J D SchwalmPopulation Health Research Institute, Hamilton Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Michael McGillionSchool of Nursing, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Elizabeth AlvarezDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Cynthia LokkerDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2436-4290
Impact · CAMcMaster University · CAPopulation Health Research Institute · CAEast Wellington Family Health Team · CASoroka Medical Center · ILUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Factors that physicians and patients consider when making decisions about using or recommending health apps are not well understood. We explored these factors to better assess how to support such decision making. Methods: We conducted an exploratory cross-sectional study in Ontario using qualitative focus groups and quantitative surveys. 133 physicians and 94 community dwelling adults completed online surveys and we held two focus groups of nine community dwelling participants who had cardiovascular risk factors and an interest in using mHealth apps. Quantitative survey data was analyzed descriptively. Focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim prior to inductive thematic content analysis. We integrated the results from the surveys and focus groups to understand factors that influence physicians' and patients' selection and use of such apps. Results: Physicians recommend apps to patients but the level of evidence they prefer to use to guide selection did not align with what they were currently using. Patients trusted recommendations and reviews from medical organizations and healthcare professionals when selecting apps and were motivated to continue using apps when they supported goal setting and tracking, data sharing, decision making, and empowerment. Conclusions: The findings highlight the significance of evaluating mHealth apps based on metrics that patients and physicians value beyond usage and clinical outcome data. Patients engage with apps that support them in confidently managing their health. Increased training and awareness of apps and creating a more rigorous evidence base showing the value of apps to supporting health goals will support greater adoption and acceptance of mHealth apps.

Indexed as

appmhealthpatient

Identifiers

PMID35646382
PMCPMC9136450
OpenAlexW4282913105

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.