ArticleJournal of patient experience2025
Patient Preference and Mobile Application Use in Hemophilia A: A Cross-Sectional Survey from Eastern Europe.
Article in Journal of patient experience, 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
Hemophilia A, a bleeding disorder caused by a deficiency of clotting factor VIII (FVIII), is commonly treated with FVIII prophylaxis. Mobile applications help personalize prophylactic regimens by creating individual pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles. This study evaluated how patients with hemophilia A use mobile applications for PK-guided prophylaxis and explored preferences and patterns of usage across different age groups. Between May and September 2022, patients from Bulgaria, Czechia, Hungary, Lithuania, and Romania participated in a cross-sectional survey. The survey collected information on demographics, documentation preferences (mobile applications or paper diaries), usage patterns, and user satisfaction. Of 84 participants, 40.5% used either a mobile application or paper diary exclusively. Czechia had the highest application usage (94.1%), followed by Romania (50.0%). While 84.2% of the application users were satisfied, many suggested improvements including better medication tracking and smartwatch compatibility. No correlation was found between age and documentation type or application preference. Mobile applications were perceived useful, but physician engagement was higher with paper diaries. These findings suggest potential to enhance mobile applications for better patient-physician interaction and user experience.
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.