ArticleJournal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open2025
Acceptability and Feasibility of a Mobile Web Application to Help Identify Nontraumatic Abdominal Patient-Reported Symptoms in the Emergency Department: A Pilot Study.
Article in Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open, 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
Objectives: We developed a mobile web application to help identify nontraumatic abdominal patient-reported symptoms (PRS) in patients who visited the emergency department (ED). Patients can use this during waiting times to facilitate patient history-taking by the physician. The study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of PRS usage in the ED by patients. Methods: A mixed-methods study was conducted at the ED of an academic tertiary hospital in Seoul, Korea. Adult patients aged ≤65 years presenting with abdominal symptoms were enrolled. We assessed PRS completion, time, and help required. Patient surveys and semi-structured interviews with patients and physicians were used to evaluate feasibility and acceptability. Results: A total of 30 patient surveys were analyzed, and in-depth interviews were conducted with 6 patients and 6 doctors. All participants completed the PRS in an average of 7.6 (SD, 5.0) minutes. Sixteen patients (53.3%) needed help with content, and 15 (50.0%) required technical assistance. The PRS was rated as acceptable based on the diffusion of innovation theory, with an average of 3.9 (SD, 0.76) out of 5. Patients reported that the PRS helped them communicate symptoms clearly but raised concerns about its usability for older patients or those in pain. Conclusion: In our pilot study, the PRS was feasible to use but required improvements in usability. Patients were acceptable to PRS use in the ED.
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.