Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36413386›Full record

SynthesisJMIR mHealth and uHealth2022

Effectiveness of Mobile Medical Apps in Ensuring Medication Safety Among Patients With Chronic Diseases: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Ting Ting Zhou, Rui Wang, Si Jia Gu, Li Ling Xie, Qing Hua Zhao, Ming Zhao Xiao, Yu Lu Chen

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The effect of smartphones and mobile apps in Egyptian Emergency Departments: A cross-sectional study.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

7 authors.

Ting Ting ZhouDepartment of Nursing, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8636-0215
Rui WangHepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Affliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-3713-936X
Si Jia GuDepartment of Nursing, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.ORCID 0000-0003-0798-296X
Li Ling XieDepartment of Nursing, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-7516-0696
Qing Hua ZhaoDepartment of Nursing, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.ORCID 0000-0003-0403-3574
Ming Zhao XiaoDepartment of Nursing, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.ORCID 0000-0003-0694-1234
Yu Lu ChenDepartment of Nursing, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.ORCID 0000-0001-9507-3592

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlong with the rapid growth of the global aging society, the mobile and health digital market has expanded greatly. Countless mobile medical apps (mmApps) have sprung up in the internet market, aiming to help patients with chronic diseases achieve medication safety.

objectiveBased on the medication safety action plans proposed by the World Health Organization, we aimed to explore the effectiveness of mmApps in ensuring the medication safety of patients with chronic diseases, including whether mmApps can improve the willingness to report adverse drug events (ADEs), improve patients' medication adherence, and reduce medication errors. We hoped to verify our hypothesis through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

methodsThe meta-analysis was performed in strict accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and included literature searched from 7 databases-PubMed, Web Of Science, Embase, CINAHL, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, and SinoMed. The publication time was limited to the time of database establishment to April 30, 2022. Studies were screened based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. The data extracted included authors, years of publication, countries or regions, participants' characteristics, intervention groups, and control groups, among others. Our quality assessment followed the guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Version 6.3. RevMan 5.2 software (Cochrane Collaboration) was used to analyze the statistical data, and a sensitivity analysis was performed to assess data stability. The degree of stability was calculated by using a different statistical method and excluding large-sample studies from the analysis.

resultsWe included 8 studies from 5 countries (China, the United States, France, Canada, and Spain) that were published from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2021. The total number of participants was 1355, and we analyzed the characteristics of included studies, each app's features, the risk of bias, and quality. The results showed that mmApps could increase ADE reporting willingness (relative risk [RR] 2.59, 95% CI 1.26-5.30; P=.009) and significantly improve medication adherence (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.04-1.31; P=.007), but they had little effect on reducing medication errors (RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.33-7.29; P=.58).

conclusionsWe analyzed the following three merits of mmApps, with regard to facilitating the willingness to report ADEs: mmApps facilitate more communication between patients and physicians, patients attach more importance to ADE reporting, and the processing of results is transparent. The use of mmApps improved medication adherence among patients with chronic diseases by conveying medical solutions, providing educational support, tracking medications, and allowing for remote consultations. Finally, we found 3 potential reasons for why our medication error results differed from those of other studies.

trial registrationPROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42022322072; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=322072.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsCanadaChinaChronic DiseaseHumansMedication Adherenceadherenceadverse effectadverse eventdigital healthdrug errordrug safetyeHealthhealth appmedication errormedication safetymeta-analysismHealthmobile applicationmobile healthpharmaceuticalreview methodologysearch strategysystematic review

Identifiers

PMID36413386
PMCPMC9727690

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.