Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39423366›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2024

Data Visualization Preferences in Remote Measurement Technology for Individuals Living With Depression, Epilepsy, and Multiple Sclerosis: Qualitative Study.

Sara Simblett, Erin Dawe-Lane, Gina Gilpin, Daniel Morris, Katie White, Sinan Erturk, Julie Devonshire, Simon Lees, Spyridon Zormpas, Ashley Polhemus and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

15 authors.

Sara SimblettInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8075-8238
Erin Dawe-LaneInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8479-6696
Gina GilpinInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9441-7979
Daniel MorrisInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5118-7344
Katie WhiteInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0925-0175
Sinan ErturkInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8789-1250
Julie DevonshireRemote Assessment of Disease And Relapse - Central Nervous System Patient Advisory Board, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4218-8323
Simon LeesRemote Assessment of Disease And Relapse - Central Nervous System Patient Advisory Board, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5140-7394
Spyridon ZormpasRemote Assessment of Disease And Relapse - Central Nervous System Patient Advisory Board, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0009-0007-8964-0117
Ashley PolhemusMedical Science Division IT Services, Prague, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-5056-5785
Gergely TemesiMedical Science Division IT Services, Prague, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-3423-2200
Nicholas CumminsInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1178-917X
Matthew HotopfInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3980-4466
Til WykesInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-5881-8003
RADAR-CNS ConsortiumInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRemote measurement technology (RMT) involves the use of wearable devices and smartphone apps to measure health outcomes in everyday life. RMT with feedback in the form of data visual representations can facilitate self-management of chronic health conditions, promote health care engagement, and present opportunities for intervention. Studies to date focus broadly on multiple dimensions of service users' design preferences and RMT user experiences (eg, health variables of perceived importance and perceived quality of medical advice provided) as opposed to data visualization preferences.

objectiveThis study aims to explore data visualization preferences and priorities in RMT, with individuals living with depression, those with epilepsy, and those with multiple sclerosis (MS).

methodsA triangulated qualitative study comparing and thematically synthesizing focus group discussions with user reviews of existing self-management apps and a systematic review of RMT data visualization preferences. A total of 45 people participated in 6 focus groups across the 3 health conditions (depression, n=17; epilepsy, n=11; and MS, n=17).

resultsThematic analysis validated a major theme around design preferences and recommendations and identified a further four minor themes: (1) data reporting, (2) impact of visualization, (3) moderators of visualization preferences, and (4) system-related factors and features.

conclusionsWhen used effectively, data visualizations are valuable, engaging components of RMT. Easy to use and intuitive data visualization design was lauded by individuals with neurological and psychiatric conditions. Apps design needs to consider the unique requirements of service users. Overall, this study offers RMT developers a comprehensive outline of the data visualization preferences of individuals living with depression, epilepsy, and MS.

Indexed as

DepressionEpilepsyFocus GroupsMultiple SclerosisQualitative ResearchAdultAgedData VisualizationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMobile ApplicationsPatient PreferenceTelemedicineWearable Electronic Devicesapplicationdatadata visualizationdepressiondevicesepilepsyfeedbackmHealthmobile phonemultiple sclerosisqualitativesmartphone appstechnologyuserswearables

Identifiers

PMID39423366
PMCPMC11530729

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.