ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2024
Identification of health-related problems in youth: a mixed methods feasibility study evaluating the Youth Health Report System.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2024. 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBecause poor health in youth risk affecting their entry in adulthood, improved methods for their early identification are needed. Health and welfare technology is widely accepted by youth populations, presenting a potential method for identifying their health problems. However, healthcare technology must be evidence-based. Specifically, feasibility studies contribute valuable information prior to more complex effects-based research. The current study assessed the process, resource, management, and scientific feasibility of the Youth Health Report System prototype, developed within a youth health clinic context in advance of an intervention study.
methodsThis mixed-methods feasibility study was conducted in a clinical setting. The process, resource, management, and scientific feasibility of the Youth Health Report System were investigated, as recommended in the literature. Participants were youth aged 16-23 years old, attending a youth health clinic, and healthcare professionals from three clinics. The youth participants used their smart phones to respond to Youth Health Report System health questions and healthcare professionals used their computer to access the results and for registration system entries. Qualitative data were collected from interviews with healthcare professionals, which were described with thematic analysis. Youth participants' quantitative Youth Health Report System data were analyzed for descriptive statistics.
resultsFeasibility analysis of qualitative data from interviews with 11 healthcare professionals resulted in three themes: We expected it could be hard; Information and routines helped but time was an issue; and The electronic case report form was valuable in the health assessment. Qualitative data were collected from the Youth Health Report System. A total of 54 youth participants completed the evaluation questionnaire, and healthcare professionals retrieved information from, and made post-appointment system entries. Quantitative results revealed few missing items and acceptable data variability. An assessment template of merged qualitative and quantitative data guided a consensus discussion among the researchers, resulting in acceptable feasibility.
conclusionsThe process-, resource-, management-, and scientific feasibility aspects were acceptable, with some modifications, strengthening the potential for a successful Youth Health Report System intervention study.
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.