ArticleFrontiers in digital health2024
Acceptability of digital health technologies in early Parkinson's disease: lessons from WATCH-PD.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dual stream transformer for medication state classification in Parkinson's disease patients using facial videos.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Patient Acceptability and Technical Reliability of Wearable Devices Used for Monitoring People With Parkinson Disease: Survey Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Perspectives on digital health and advanced treatment referral in Parkinson's care among Danish neurologists: a mixed methods study.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- L-Dopa/Carbidopa intestinal gel infusion in advanced Parkinson's disease: real-life mobility insights from wearable sensors.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Digital health technologies (DHTs) have the potential to alleviate challenges experienced in clinical trials through more objective, naturalistic, and frequent assessments of functioning. However, implementation of DHTs come with their own challenges, including acceptability and ease of use for study participants. In addition to acceptability, it is also important to understand device proficiency in the general population and within patient populations who may be asked to use DHTs for extended periods of time. We thus aimed to provide an overview of participant feedback on acceptability of DHTs, including body-worn sensors used in the clinic and a mobile application used at-home, used throughout the duration of the Wearable Assessments in the Clinic and at Home in Parkinson's Disease (WATCH-PD) study, an observational, longitudinal study looking at disease progression in early Parkinson's Disease (PD). Methods: 82 participants with PD and 50 control participants were enrolled at 17 sites throughout the United States and followed for 12 months. We assessed participants' general device proficiency at baseline, using the Mobile Device Proficiency Questionnaire (MDPQ). The mean MDPQ score at Baseline did not significantly differ between PD patients and healthy controls (20.6 [2.91] vs 21.5 [2.94], Results: Questionnaire results demonstrated that participants had generally positive views on the comfort and use of the digital technologies throughout the duration of the study, regardless of group. Discussion: This is the first study to evaluate patient feedback and impressions of using technology in a longitudinal observational study in early Parkinson's Disease. Results demonstrate device proficiency and acceptability of various DHTs in people with Parkinson's does not differ from that of neurologically healthy older adults, and, overall, participants had a favorable view of the DHTs deployed in the WATCH-PD 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.