ArticleBMC rheumatology2025
Evaluation of usability, feasibility and acceptance of the digital training diary Trainingslog for individuals with axSpA: a mixed-method study.
Article in BMC rheumatology, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPhysical activity (PA), including regular exercise, is essential for the successful management of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). To promote a physically active lifestyle, a digital training diary (Trainingslog) was developed in an user-centered approach by the Swiss Ankylosing Spondylitis Association (SVMB). A training diary promotes PA through feedback, goal setting and self-monitoring, which can also be used for PA counselling by physiotherapists (PT). Usability, feasibility and acceptance are essential for the successful implementation of a mobile Health Intervention such as the Trainingslog. The study objective is to evaluate the usability, feasibility and acceptance of the Trainingslog for individuals with axSpA and PTs.
methodsA mixed-methods design was performed among potential end-users of the Trainingslog. Quantitative data was collected by use of questionnaires (System Usability Scale (SUS, 0-100 scale), user version of the Mobile App Rating Scale (uMARS, 5 point scale)) and number of training entries. Subsequently, qualitative data was gathered through semi-structured online focus groups or individual interviews.
results11 PTs (9 women, mean age 52.5 [SD 15.6]) and 10 individuals with axSpA (6 women, mean age 48 [SD 13.4]) participated. The quantitative data showed mean SUS scores for usability of 82.5 [SD 21.76] for PTs and 77.0 [SD 9.34] for individuals with axSpA. The mean uMARS sector B scores for feasibility were 4.2 [SD 0.49] for PTs and 4.1 [SD 0.38] for individuals with axSpA. Acceptance, as indicated by the uMARS results (mean score > 3 in Sectors E and F for both groups), was given. But there was a lower-than-expected agreement in the training entries, with 59.86% of entries matching between the Trainingslog and the paper diary. The qualitative analysis unveiled that while usability and feasibility were good, acceptance was lower, primarily due to the use of a web-based link instead of an app version.
conclusionThe Trainingslog showed a good usability and feasibility, while the acceptance was lower than expected. Acceptance could be increased by offering the Trainingslog as an app-based version, along with implementing additional recommendations for enhancement. Consequently, the Trainingslog has the potential to be applied in PA counselling by PTs or as a self-monitoring tool for individuals with axSpA.
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.