ArticleBMJ open2025
Equity of digital self-management tools in adults with multiple long-term conditions: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAdults living with multiple long-term conditions (MLTC)-defined as the presence of two or more physical or mental health conditions-often face fragmented and complex care. Digital tools offer scalable self-management solutions but may exacerbate inequities due to the digital divide and other factors. The aim of this scoping review is to map and summarise the existing literature on digital self-management tools used in MLTC, with a particular focus on how equity of access is considered in their development, implementation and evaluation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Scoping review methodology will be based on the Joanna Briggs Institute guidance for scoping reviews and Arskey and O'Malley's framework and will be reported in alignment with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. Comprehensive search terms based on 'multimorbidity', 'digital tools' and 'self-management' have been developed. Peer-reviewed publications will be identified using MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, Scopus, CINAHL and PubMed. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts, with subsequent full text review also being performed in duplicate to ensure they meet the eligibility criteria. Discrepancies will be resolved by discussion with a third reviewer. Included studies will focus on digital tools for the self-management of MLTC in adults (≥18 years old) in any setting. Equity dimensions will include, but are not limited to, digital literacy, treatment burden, socioeconomic status, polypharmacy and access disparities. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this scoping review. The results of the scoping review will be published in an open access, peer-reviewed journal for wider dissemination. Additionally, findings will contribute to topic guides and mapping of a research networking event with key stakeholders (including patient and public involvement and engagement members, clinicians, researchers and industry) in MLTC, around the same subject area.
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.