Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37329131›Full record

ArticleNursing open2023

Wearable activity trackers for nurses' health: A qualitative acceptability study.

Catherine Mahoney, Louise Hoyle, Casper Van Splunter, Richard G Kyle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nursing open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Catherine MahoneySchool of Health and Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK.
Louise HoyleFaculty of Health Science & Sport, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK.
Casper Van SplunterFaculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Richard G KyleAcademy of Nursing, Department of Health and Care Professions, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6394-109X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo assess the practical, social and ethical acceptability of the use of a POLAR® H7 chest-strap wearable device to influence health behaviours among pre-registered nurses.

designQualitative acceptability study including a simulated test of use reported using COREQ guidelines.

methodsPre-registered nurses simulated nine nursing tasks while wearing the chest strap in a clinical simulation facility in a Scottish university in 2016. Focus groups and semi-structured interviews were conducted to assess technology acceptance with participants who did and did not participate in the simulated nursing tasks. Focus groups and interviews were transcribed and analysed thematically guided by a theoretical model of technology acceptance.

resultsPre-registered nurses thought the use of chest-strap devices to monitor their own health in real-time was acceptable. However, participants shared that it was important that the use of technology was inclusive and supportive of nurses' health and cautioned against misuse of data from wearable devices for individual performance management or stigmatisation.

Indexed as

NursesWearable Electronic DevicesFitness TrackersFocus GroupsHumansQualitative Researchnurses' healthsimulationtechnology acceptancewearable activity trackers

Identifiers

PMID37329131
PMCPMC10415986

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.