ArticleHealth research policy and systems2025
Implementing exergames into healthcare for chronic conditions - insights from stakeholders: a qualitative study.
Article in Health research policy and systems, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundExergaming, which combines physical exercise with video gaming, has shown benefits for individuals with chronic conditions. Implementation occurs at different levels and phases and influenced by various factors. To address the factors that influence the implementation of exergaming in healthcare, we aimed to explore stakeholder's experiences of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats to the implementation of exergaming (in preparation, execution and continuation) for individuals with chronic conditions, in healthcare at the micro, meso and macro level.
methodsA qualitative study with deductive content analysis was performed to explore stakeholder's experiences regarding the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOTs) of implementing exergaming in healthcare. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 24 stakeholders, including patient representatives, researchers, healthcare professionals, game developers and individuals involved in healthcare regulations.
resultsAt the micro level assessing patient's needs and involving stakeholders in the development and evaluation phases were described as strengths in implementing exergaming in healthcare. Weaknesses included patient's lack of digital literacy and healthcare professional's concerns about the safety and quality of exergames. The involvement of healthcare professionals and family support were described as opportunities, whereas threats included the challenge of tailoring exergames to patient's needs and healthcare professional's fear of losing control over the technology. At the meso level, strengths involved collaboration between healthcare professionals and technicians, whereas weaknesses included the high cost and time required for designing exergames. Opportunities were found the use of existing exergames, and threats involved competition for research grants and staff turnover. At the macro level, strengths included supportive regulations and collaboration among policy-makers, whereas weaknesses involved defining intended use and fragmented responsibilities. Opportunities were identified in governmental funding programs and international collaborations, whereas threats included challenges in data storage and sharing.
conclusionsThe effective implementation of exergaming in healthcare requires coordinated efforts. Stakeholder's involvement, supportive leadership and digital readiness are crucial for successful implementation, while inconsistent implementation of the policies and limited evidence on patient safety pose significant barriers. These insights can inform future strategies for integrating exergaming into healthcare settings.
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.