ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2023
Characterizing terminology applied by authors and database producers to informatics literature on consumer engagement with wearable devices.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIdentifying consumer health informatics (CHI) literature is challenging. To recommend strategies to improve discoverability, we aimed to characterize controlled vocabulary and author terminology applied to a subset of CHI literature on wearable technologies. MATERIALS AND
methodsTo retrieve articles from PubMed that addressed patient/consumer engagement with wearables, we developed a search strategy of textwords and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). To refine our methodology, we used a random sample of 200 articles from 2016 to 2018. A descriptive analysis of articles (N = 2522) from 2019 identified 308 (12.2%) CHI-related articles, for which we characterized their assigned terminology. We visualized the 100 most frequent terms assigned to the articles from MeSH, author keywords, CINAHL, and Engineering Databases (Compendex and Inspec together). We assessed the overlap of CHI terms among sources and evaluated terms related to consumer engagement.
resultsThe 308 articles were published in 181 journals, more in health journals (82%) than informatics (11%). Only 44% were indexed with the MeSH term "wearable electronic devices." Author keywords were common (91%) but rarely represented consumer engagement with device data, eg, self-monitoring (n = 12, 0.7%) or self-management (n = 9, 0.5%). Only 10 articles (3%) had terminology from all sources (authors, PubMed, CINAHL, Compendex, and Inspec). DISCUSSION: Our main finding was that consumer engagement was not well represented in health and engineering database thesauri.
conclusionsAuthors of CHI studies should indicate consumer/patient engagement and the specific technology investigated in titles, abstracts, and author keywords to facilitate discovery by readers and expand vocabularies and indexing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.