ArticleDigital health
Attitudes and perspectives of nurses and physicians in South Korea towards the clinical use of person-generated health data.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to explore the adoption of person-generated health data in clinical settings and discern the factors influencing clinicians' willingness to use it. A web-based survey containing 48 questions was developed based on prior research and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 model. The survey was administered to a convenience sample of 486 nurses and physicians in South Korea recruited through an online community and snowball sampling. Of these, 70.7% were physicians. While 65% had used mobile health apps and devices, only 12.8% were familiar with person-generated health data. Still, a promising 73.3% expressed interest in incorporating person-generated health data into patient care, particularly data on blood glucose and vital signs. The findings of the study also indicated that clinicians specializing in internal medicine (OR: 1.9, CI: 1.16-3.19), familiar with person-generated health data (OR: 2.6, CI: 1.58-4.29), with a positive view of information and communication technology adoption (OR: 2.6, CI: 1.65-4.13), and who see the value in person-generated health data (OR: 3.9, CI: 2.55-6.09) showed higher inclination to utilize it. However, those in outpatient settings (OR: 0.4, CI: 0.19-0.73) showed less enthusiasm. The findings of this study suggest that despite the willingness of clinicians to use person-generated health data, various barriers must be addressed first, including a lack of knowledge regarding its use, concerns about data reliability and quality, and a lack of provider incentives. Overcoming these challenges demands concerted organizational or policy support. This research underscores person-generated health data's untapped potential in healthcare and the pressing need for strategies that facilitate its clinical integration.
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.