Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36701179›Full record

ArticleJMIR human factors2023

Understanding the Subjective Experience of Long-term Remote Measurement Technology Use for Symptom Tracking in People With Depression: Multisite Longitudinal Qualitative Analysis.

Katie M White, Erin Dawe-Lane, Sara Siddi, Femke Lamers, Sara Simblett, Gemma Riquelme Alacid, Alina Ivan, Inez Myin-Germeys, Josep Maria Haro, Carolin Oetzmann and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR human factors, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. 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

17 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Katie M WhiteDepartment of Psychological Medicine, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0925-0175
Erin Dawe-LaneDepartment of Psychology, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8479-6696
Sara SiddiParc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu, Fundació Sant Joan de Déu, CIBERSAM, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1494-9028
Femke LamersDepartment of Psychiatry, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4344-5766
Sara SimblettDepartment of Psychology, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8075-8238
Gemma Riquelme AlacidParc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu, Fundació Sant Joan de Déu, CIBERSAM, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6813-3577
Alina IvanDepartment of Psychological Medicine, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3633-1955
Inez Myin-GermeysCenter for Contextual Psychiatry, Department of Neurosciences, UK Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3731-4930
Josep Maria HaroParc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu, Fundació Sant Joan de Déu, CIBERSAM, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3984-277X
Carolin OetzmannDepartment of Psychological Medicine, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1480-917X
Priya PopatDepartment of Psychological Medicine, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2946-0700
Aki RintalaCenter for Contextual Psychiatry, Department of Neurosciences, UK Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0066-4697
Elena Rubio-AbadalParc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu, Fundació Sant Joan de Déu, CIBERSAM, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5845-5636
Til WykesDepartment of Psychology, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5881-8003
Claire HendersonHealth Service & Population Research Department, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6998-5659
Matthew HotopfDepartment of Psychological Medicine, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3980-4466
Faith MatchamDepartment of Psychological Medicine, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4055-904X
King's College London · GBParc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu · ESKU Leuven · BEUniversity of Sussex · GBVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRemote measurement technologies (RMTs) have the potential to revolutionize major depressive disorder (MDD) disease management by offering the ability to assess, monitor, and predict symptom changes. However, the promise of RMT data depends heavily on sustained user engagement over extended periods. In this paper, we report a longitudinal qualitative study of the subjective experience of people with MDD engaging with RMTs to provide insight into system usability and user experience and to provide the basis for future promotion of RMT use in research and clinical practice.

objectiveWe aimed to understand the subjective experience of long-term engagement with RMTs using qualitative data collected in a longitudinal study of RMTs for monitoring MDD. The objectives were to explore the key themes associated with long-term RMT use and to identify recommendations for future system engagement.

methodsIn this multisite, longitudinal qualitative research study, 124 semistructured interviews were conducted with 99 participants across the United Kingdom, Spain, and the Netherlands at 3-month, 12-month, and 24-month time points during a study exploring RMT use (the Remote Assessment of Disease and Relapse-Major Depressive Disorder study). Data were analyzed using thematic analysis, and interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and coded in the native language, with the resulting quotes translated into English.

resultsThere were 5 main themes regarding the subjective experience of long-term RMT use: research-related factors, the utility of RMTs for self-management, technology-related factors, clinical factors, and system amendments and additions.

conclusionsThe subjective experience of long-term RMT use can be considered from 2 main perspectives: experiential factors (how participants construct their experience of engaging with RMTs) and system-related factors (direct engagement with the technologies). A set of recommendations based on these strands are proposed for both future research and the real-world implementation of RMTs into clinical practice. Future exploration of experiential engagement with RMTs will be key to the successful use of RMTs in clinical care.

Indexed as

depressionengagementmental healthmobile phonequalitativeremote measurementtechnologytelehealth

Identifiers

PMID36701179
PMCPMC9945920
OpenAlexW4318169576

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.