ArticleJournal of research in pharmacy practice
An Evaluation on Five Dimensions of a Mobile Health Application for Patient Counseling in Ambulatory Care Pharmacy: A Single-center Cross-sectional Survey Based on Pediatric Caregiver's Opinion.
Article in Journal of research in pharmacy practice. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Due to high workloads and insufficient counseling time in ambulatory care pharmacy, outpatient pharmacists for pediatric patients in China proposed a mobile health application (mHealth app) that they considered could provide patient counseling more efficiently. To improve it accordingly, we need to design a more specific and multi-dimensional evaluation method to obtain pediatric caregivers' evaluations of a mHealth app. Methods: A cross-sectional survey on five dimensions (transmission, accuracy, accessibility, completeness, and experience) of the mHealth app was conducted using a random questionnaire among outpatient caregivers at a children's hospital. Findings: We received 478 valid questionnaires from 500 caregivers. The Item-Level Content Validity Index (I-CVI) indicated the content validity of the questions (I-CVI =1.000). The Content Validity Index for Scales (S-CVI) confirmed their content validity (S-CVI =1.000). The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) of test-retest reliability were acceptable (0.806≤ ICC ≤0.869). The mean scores for transmission, accuracy, accessibility, and completeness were more than 3.5 when the experience was 2.1. Caregivers of different ages agreed that their accuracy was satisfactory; however, their experience was not. Caregivers aged over 50 years did not recognize its transmission and accessibility, whereas caregivers aged under 29 years and over 50 years were not satisfied with its completeness. Conclusion: The accuracy of the mHealth app is excellent; the transmission and accessibility need to give the silver generation time to accept and adapt, and experience and completeness should be improved. The five-dimensional assessment model can also be used to evaluate other mHealth apps for patient counseling.
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.