ArticleJMIR formative research2025
Patient Acceptability and Technical Reliability of Wearable Devices Used for Monitoring People With Parkinson Disease: Survey Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- The future digital outpatient clinic for movement disorders: from technological innovation to ethical and systemic implementation-a position paper.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2026Review
- Feasibility and Acceptability of Intervention and Trial Procedures of the UCL Live Well With Parkinson's Self-Management Toolkit.Parkinson's disease · 2025Article
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
Background: Parkinson disease is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder with complex motor and nonmotor symptoms. To assess these, clinical assessments are completed, providing a snapshot of a person's experience. Monitoring Parkinson disease using wearable devices can provide continuous and objective data and capture information on movement patterns in daily life. Objective: The aim of the study is to assess patient acceptability and technical reliability of 2 wearable devices used in clinical trials (ActivInsights and Axivity AX3). Methods: Participants in a feasibility study testing a self-management toolkit (PD-Care) optionally wore a wearable device for 1 week, providing feedback through an open- and closed-question survey conducted over the telephone about the acceptability of wearing the device. The closed questions used a Likert scale from 1 to 5 (with 1=strongly agree and 5=strongly disagree) asking whether (1) the device was comfortable to wear, (2) the device was easy to put on, (3) the device was easy to wear, (4) the device was embarrassing to wear, and (5) if they were happy to wear the device for longer than 7 days. Differences in acceptability between devices were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U tests and Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank tests. These were followed by open-ended questions asking (1) How did you find wearing the device? (2) How did you find putting the device on? (3) Did you take it off and why? (4) What was your overall impression? (5) Did you prefer the wrist- or trunk-worn device and why (Axivity AX3 only)? Results: A total of 22 of 32 (69%) participants offered the device agreed to wear it. There were no significant differences in the demographic characteristics between those monitored and those who chose not to be. Acceptance with both devices was generally good. The ActivInsights device was more acceptable than the wrist- and trunk-worn Axivity AX3 devices, as more participants found it to be comfortable (n=15, 100% vs n=5, 71%; P=.02 and n=4, 57%; P=.004, respectively), easy to wear (n=15, 100% vs n=6, 86%; P=.048 and n=3, 43%; P=.004, respectively) and would wear for more than 7 days (n=13, 87% vs n=4, 57%; P=.02 and n=1, 14%; P<.001, respectively). The trunk-worn Axivity AX3 device had the lowest acceptance rates, but there were no statistical differences in acceptability between the wrist- and trunk-worn Axivity AX3 devices (all P>.05). There were issues with battery life and recording errors in 3 of 14 (21%) Axivity AX3 devices and upload failures in 3 of 15 (20%) ActivInsights devices. Conclusions: Acceptability of wearables for monitoring Parkinson was satisfactory, especially when wrist-worn, although a few participants experienced difficulties in correct use, and there were some errors with the data upload.
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.