Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35763339›Full record

ReviewJMIR human factors2022

User Perceptions of eHealth and mHealth Services Promoting Physical Activity and Healthy Diets: Systematic Review.

Julia Bergevi, Susanne Andermo, Yohannes Woldamanuel, Unn-Britt Johansson, Maria Hagströmer, Jenny Rossen

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR human factors, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
9.2field-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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Mobile health delivered physical activity after mild stroke or transient ischemic attack: Is it feasible and acceptable?International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2025
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Julia BergeviDepartment of Health Promoting Science, Sophiahemmet University, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0665-9039
Susanne AndermoDepartment of Neurobiology, Care Sciences, and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8006-1991
Yohannes WoldamanuelDepartment of Health Promoting Science, Sophiahemmet University, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3657-7536
Unn-Britt JohanssonDepartment of Health Promoting Science, Sophiahemmet University, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3309-136X
Maria HagströmerDepartment of Health Promoting Science, Sophiahemmet University, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4607-8677
Jenny Rossen *Department of Health Promoting Science, Sophiahemmet University, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4920-252X
Sophiahemmet University College · SEKarolinska Institutet · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPhysical activity and a diet that follows general recommendations can help to prevent noncommunicable diseases. However, most adults do not meet current recommended guidelines, and support for behavior change needs to be strengthened. There is growing evidence that shows the benefits of eHealth and mobile health (mHealth) services in promoting healthy habits; however, their long-term effectiveness is uncertain because of nonadherence.

objectiveWe aimed to explore users' perceptions of acceptability, engagement, and usability of eHealth and mHealth services that promote physical activity, healthy diets, or both in the primary or secondary prevention of noncommunicable diseases.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review with a narrative synthesis. We performed the literature search in PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL electronic databases in February 2021 and July 2021. The search was limited to papers published in English between 2016 and 2021. Papers on qualitative and mixed method studies that encompassed eHealth and mHealth services for adults with a focus on physical activity, healthy diet, or both in the primary or secondary prevention of noncommunicable diseases were included. Three authors screened the studies independently, and 2 of the authors separately performed thematic analysis of qualitative data.

resultsWith an initial finding of 6308 articles and the removal of 427 duplicates, 23 articles were deemed eligible for inclusion in the review. Based on users' preferences, an overarching theme-eHealth and mHealth services provide value but need to be tailored to individual needs-and 5 subthemes-interactive and integrated; varying and multifunctional; easy, pedagogic, and attractive; individualized and customizable; and reliable-emerged.

conclusionsNew evidence on the optimization of digital services that promote physical activity and healthy diets has been synthesized. The findings represent users' perceptions of acceptability, engagement, and usability of eHealth and mHealth services and show that services should be personalized, dynamic, easily manageable, and reliable. These findings can help improve adherence to digital health-promoting services.

Indexed as

acceptabilitybehavior changeengagementhealth technologyhealthy dietnoncommunicable diseasesphysical activityqualitative studiesusabilityuser feedback

Identifiers

PMID35763339
PMCPMC9277535
OpenAlexW4283640222

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.