Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36310682›Full record

ArticleCardiovascular digital health journal2022

Staff acceptability and patient usability of a self-screening kiosk for atrial fibrillation in general practice waiting rooms.

Kirsty McKenzie, Nicole Lowres, Jessica Orchard, Charlotte Hespe, Ben Freedman, Katrina Giskes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cardiovascular digital health journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

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

  1. Key stakeholder views on atrial fibrillation screening: a systematic mixed-studies review and interpretive analysis.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Feasibility of quick response-based quality improvement projects in an urban primary care setting: A cross-sectional survey.Malaysian family physician : the official journal of the Academy of Family Physicians of Malaysia · 2024
    Article
  7. 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.

Kirsty McKenzieHeart Research Institute, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Nicole LowresHeart Research Institute, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Jessica OrchardFaculty of Medicine and Health and Charles Perkins Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Charlotte HespeDepartment of General Practice, School of Medicine, University of Notre Dame, Sydney, Australia.
Ben FreedmanHeart Research Institute, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Katrina GiskesHeart Research Institute, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Current Australian and European guidelines recommend opportunistic screening for atrial fibrillation (AF) among patients ≥65 years, but general practitioners (GPs) report time constraints as a major barrier to achieving this. Patient self-screening stations in GP waiting rooms may increase screening rates and case detection of AF, but the acceptability of patient self-screening from the practice staff perspective, and the usability by patients, is unknown. Objective: To determine staff perspectives on AF self-screening stations and factors impacting acceptability, usability by patients, and sustainability. Methods: We performed semi-structured interviews with 20 general practice staff and observations of 22 patients while they were undertaking self-screening. Interviews were coded and data analyzed using an iterative thematic analysis approach. Results: GPs indicated high levels of acceptance of self-screening, and reported little impact on their workflow. Reception staff recognized the importance of screening for AF, but reported significant impacts on their workflow because some patients were unable to perform screening without assistance. Patient observations corroborated these findings and suggested some potential ways to improve usability. Conclusion: AF self-screening in GP waiting rooms may be a viable method to increase opportunistic screening by GPs, but the impacts on reception workflow need to be mitigated for the method to be upscaled for more widespread screening. Furthermore, more age-appropriate station design may increase patient usability and thereby also reduce impact on reception workflow.

Indexed as

Atrial fibrillationGeneral practiceOlder peopleScreeningSelf-screeningSelf-service kiosksStroke prevention

Identifiers

PMID36310682
PMCPMC9596310

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.