Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35687400›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2022

Electronic Health Record-Based Recruitment and Retention and Mobile Health App Usage: Multisite Cohort Study.

Janelle W Coughlin, Lindsay M Martin, Di Zhao, Attia Goheer, Thomas B Woolf, Katherine Holzhauer, Harold P Lehmann, Michelle R Lent, Kathleen M McTigue, Jeanne M Clark and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Inequalities in Exclusively Mobile Interventions Targeting Weight-Related Behaviors: Systematic Review of Observational Studies.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

11 authors.

Janelle W CoughlinDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7924-5892
Lindsay M MartinDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5822-6542
Di ZhaoWelch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology and Clinical Research, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9978-6773
Attia GoheerDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5908-7049
Thomas B WoolfDepartment of Physiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4523-2772
Katherine HolzhauerDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4121-8319
Harold P LehmannDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-7698-219X
Michelle R LentSchool of Professional and Applied Psychology, Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7892-1879
Kathleen M McTigueDivision of General Internal Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0752-1576
Jeanne M ClarkWelch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology and Clinical Research, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1194-0092
Wendy L BennettWelch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology and Clinical Research, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9828-0706

Funding

Institute for Clinical and Translational ResearchUL1TR001079 · NCATS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI FORD, DANIEL ERNEST · 2013 to 2017
$60.1M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001079
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo address the obesity epidemic, there is a need for novel paradigms, including those that address the timing of eating and sleep in relation to circadian rhythms. Electronic health records (EHRs) are an efficient way to identify potentially eligible participants for health research studies. Mobile health (mHealth) apps offer available and convenient data collection of health behaviors, such as timing of eating and sleep.

objectiveThe aim of this descriptive analysis was to report on recruitment, retention, and app use from a 6-month cohort study using a mobile app called Daily24.

methodsUsing an EHR query, adult patients from three health care systems in the PaTH clinical research network were identified as potentially eligible, invited electronically to participate, and instructed to download and use the Daily24 mobile app, which focuses on eating and sleep timing. Online surveys were completed at baseline and 4 months. We described app use and identified predictors of app use, defined as 1 or more days of use, versus nonuse and usage categories (ie, immediate, consistent, and sustained) using multivariate regression analyses.

resultsOf 70,661 patients who were sent research invitations, 1021 (1.44%) completed electronic consent forms and online baseline surveys; 4 withdrew, leaving a total of 1017 participants in the analytic sample. A total of 53.79% (n=547) of the participants were app users and, of those, 75.3% (n=412), 50.1% (n=274), and 25.4% (n=139) were immediate, consistent, and sustained users, respectively. Median app use was 28 (IQR 7-75) days over 6 months. Younger age, White race, higher educational level, higher income, having no children younger than 18 years, and having used 1 to 5 health apps significantly predicted app use (vs nonuse) in adjusted models. Older age and lower BMI predicted early, consistent, and sustained use. About half (532/1017, 52.31%) of the participants completed the 4-month online surveys. A total of 33.5% (183/547), 29.3% (157/536), and 27.1% (143/527) of app users were still using the app for at least 2 days per month during months 4, 5, and 6 of the study, respectively.

conclusionsEHR recruitment offers an efficient (ie, high reach, low touch, and minimal participant burden) approach to recruiting participants from health care settings into mHealth research. Efforts to recruit and retain less engaged subgroups are needed to collect more generalizable data. Additionally, future app iterations should include more evidence-based features to increase participant use.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsTelemedicineAdolescentAdultCohort StudiesElectronic Health RecordsHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesEHRengagementmHealthmobile appsobesityrecruitmentretentiontiming of eatingtiming of sleep

Identifiers

PMID35687400
PMCPMC9233254

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.