ArticleHeliyon2024
The acceptability of wearable technology for long-term respiratory disease: A cross-sectional survey.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors Influencing the Use of Mobile Apps and Wearables: Pre- and Post-Surgery Quality of Life Assessment Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- The role of digital health in respiratory diseases management: a narrative review of recent literature.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Few studies have investigated the acceptability of wearable technology in patients with long-term respiratory disease. We conducted a 24-item cross-sectional survey (September 2022-February 2023), developed using four common themes universal to previously described models of technology acceptance and social behavioural therapy, to explore the acceptability of wearable technology spanning the breadth of chronic respiratory disease. A total of 74 valid survey responses were analysed with 50 % aged 51-70years; 72 % female; 63 % white British ethnicity; 79 % having an income less than £50,000, and 93 % having at least obstructive airways disease. A third of participants current used wearables with 85 % using smart watches. Most of these participants used wearables to monitor their symptoms (69 %) and as a general health measurement device (85 %). Likert scale questions (ranked 1-7) showed that participants valued accuracy and approval of wearables by regulatory bodies (median (IQR) rank score 7 (Huberty et al., 2015; Preusse et al., 2016) 6-76-7 and felt that wearables would increase their confidence in managing their long-term health condition (median (IQR) rank score 6 (Huberty et al., 2015; Preusse et al., 2016) 6-76-7. Favourable product characteristics for wearables were accuracy (73 %), easy to learn (63 %) and easy to use (50 %). They were less concerned about aesthetics (23 %) and battery life (27 %). This survey will guide future developers to produce a wearable for a population with chronic respiratory disease which will improve acceptability, usability and longevity.
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.