ArticleMuscles (Basel, Switzerland)2025
AppER: Design and Validation of a Mobile Application for Caregivers of Patients with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy and Their Families in Spain and Latin America.
Article in Muscles (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Psychological Burden of Neuromuscular Diseases: A Narrative Review of Anxiety, Depression, Coping, and Quality of Life.Muscles (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimThe study developed and validated AppER, an mHealth tool for informal caregivers of children with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, and examined differences between app users and non-users.
methodsFour phases were followed: (1) focus groups with experts and caregivers to identify care-related domains; (2) prototype development and validity testing (CVR, I-CVI, I-FVI) using the MARS scale; (3) implementation of the final app; and (4) psychosocial profiling of 88 caregivers (42 users and 46 non-users) measuring quality of life, dependency, somatic symptoms, and coping strategies.
resultsAppER showed high content and face validity, surpassing reference thresholds. In the psychosocial analysis, users reported lower perceived quality of life than non-users, despite no significant differences in dependency, somatic symptoms, or coping strategies.
conclusionsEmployment patterns differed: more users were dedicated to household tasks, while more non-users were self-employed, suggesting economic factors may affect app uptake and quality of life perceptions. Findings indicate AppER is a valid, well-rated support tool, and that caregivers with lower perceived quality of life may be more inclined to adopt digital health solutions, potentially to address complex care demands. Designing targeted digital interventions may be particularly valuable for those in less favorable socioeconomic contexts. Because of the small sample and between-group imbalances, results are exploratory and warrant confirmation in larger, balanced samples.
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.