ArticleJMIR human factors2026
An Online Epilepsy Self-Management Tool for Patients With Epilepsy: A Formative Usability Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2026. 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.
- MINDSET 2.0: feasibility of digital decision support for epilepsy self-management.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Epilepsy is a serious chronic neurological condition with no permanent cure. Continual self-management is important to mitigate seizure frequency and optimize quality of life in people with epilepsy who have greater disparities in accessing epilepsy care. The Management Information & Decision Support Epilepsy Tool (MINDSET [UTHealth, University of Arizona, and Radiant Digital]) was developed to enhance accessibility to epilepsy self-management (ESM) assessment and treatment. The purpose of this formative usability pilot study was to assess the user experience and functionality of MINDSET 2.0, an enhanced cross-platform online version of MINDSET, among a sample of patients with epilepsy prior to feasibility testing within neurology clinic settings. Methods: MINDSET 2.0 comprised an updated cross-platform architecture for easier accessibility and added quality of life, cognitive function, and social determinants assessments. User experience and functionality were assessed in January 2022. Six patients with epilepsy in Texas (n=4) and Arizona (n=2) participated in individual online usability sessions, completing a sociodemographic survey, accessing all components of MINDSET, and then completing usability rating scales and an exit interview. Logical inconsistencies in embedded algorithms were examined for the usability sample and in user case challenges to ensure functional fidelity. Results: Patients reported low adherence to ESM behaviors in each of the management domains. More than 80% of patients agreed that MINDSET 2.0 was acceptable, easy to use, likable, credible, of appropriate duration, and motivationally appealing. Patients agreed that the program helped them think about and manage their epilepsy more carefully, and that it improved decision-making between them and their health care providers (100%). Patients provided lower ratings (≤50%) and reported the greatest number of difficulties with their understanding of how to select goals and strategies, and develop an action plan due to constraints of item response options leading to user confusion. An inconsistency in algorithm branched logic was identified that related to translating depression scores into recommendations for depression self-management programming. Conclusions: The results replicated usability findings from earlier versions of MINDSET but also catalyzed adjustments to user survey response options and algorithm repair. The value of the formative user experience functionality assessment was demonstrated to ensure a high-fidelity program prior to feasibility testing in neurology clinic 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.