ArticleNPJ digital medicine2025
Attitudes of healthcare professionals and researchers toward wearable and app derived patient generated health data.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- MediaPipe-Based Activity Analysis by Healthcare Professionals: Method Development and Technology Acceptance-A Pilot Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Personal Health Large Language Models and the Negotiation of Medical Authority in Clinical Care: Opportunities, Risks, and Governance.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Physicians' Perceptions and Demand Regarding Clinical and Secondary Use of Patient-Generated Health Data: Cross-Sectional Survey.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Wearable Devices and Data Sharing in the US.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- A scoping review on using real-world data to evaluate the effectiveness of mHealth applications.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Healthcare professionals' perspectives on digital biomarkers for monitoring inflammatory arthritis: insights from a qualitative study rooted in design thinking.EULAR rheumatology open · 2026Article
- Article
- A user-driven consent platform for health data sharing in digital health applications.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Can a Commercially Available Smartwatch Device Accurately Measure Nighttime Sleep Outcomes in Individuals with Knee Osteoarthritis and Comorbid Insomnia? A Comparison with Home-Based Polysomnography.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
Abstract
Patient-generated health data (PGHD) from apps and wearables hold significant potential for enhancing personalised care and medical research. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) are key to its successful adoption, as their attitudes can either support or hinder its integration into clinical practice. This review systematically analysed studies on HCPs' and researchers' perspectives on PGHD for clinical and research use. Three databases were searched for articles published between January 2013 and April 2023. Of 246 articles screened, 33 met the inclusion criteria. While most participants viewed PGHD positively, concerns around data security, reliability, and workflow integration persist. Addressing these barriers is essential to maximising PGHD's benefits for participatory medicine and improved clinical outcomes. The included studies presented medium methodological quality, particularly among quantitative and mixed methods with risks of sampling and nonresponse bias, and often low sample sizes in qualitative studies. However, recurring themes across studies allow a valuable interpretation of the findings.
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.