ArticleFrontiers in digital health2026
"
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The use of digital health technologies to access information and services related to sexual and reproductive health has been increasing. Despite the usefulness of these technologies, there are emerging concerns that they could inadvertently trigger, perpetuate and exacerbate trauma among patients. The purpose of this study was to explore trauma-informed care principles that could be applied in designing and/or utilizing sexual and reproductive health services. Method: We conducted 5 focus group discussions with participants who have used digital health technologies to access sexual and reproductive health services in Western Canada. The discussion centred on ways sexual health-related digital technologies could prevent triggering or perpetuating trauma among patients. The discussion took place over Zoom, and the data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. Results: The study revealed five main considerations that could be adopted in the design and use of sexual and reproductive health technologies to prevent the unintended consequences of trauma. These include (1) integrating accessibility and inclusivity features; (2) integrating confidentiality, safety, and privacy features like quick exit buttons; (3) using empathetic language and terminologies; (4) integrating emotional and psychological support services; and (5) implementing aesthetic design features. Conclusion: The findings of this study would help produce equitable, safe, and empowering digital health technologies for all users, particularly trauma survivors. By integrating these principles, developers and healthcare providers can create tools that reduce barriers, mitigate re-traumatization risks, and promote positive health outcomes. Future research should focus on evaluating the implementation and impact of trauma-informed digital tools in diverse 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.