ArticleBMJ innovations2026
Acceptability of digital health solutions and AI: qualitative interviews with perimenopausal women experiencing health inequalities.
Article in BMJ innovations, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Exploring the acceptability of digital health and artificial intelligence (AI) to perimenopausal women experiencing health inequalities. Setting: We recruited five community leaders representing organisations which support women who experience health inequalities, across the UK. Leaders represented ethnic minority-focused groups as well as groups representing broader disadvantage such as menopause or wellness groups based in areas of deprivation and domestic abuse support groups and were chosen to represent the experience of women in perimenopause who also experienced health inequalities. Data were collected from 84 women via five different community leaders and seven community groups in 24 qualitative datasets, which included 14 focus groups and 10 individual interviews. Inclusion criteria included experience of peri-menopause and membership within the designated group. Women who were beyond their last menstrual period were included to reflect on their experiences during peri-menopause as well as those actively experiencing symptoms. Analysis used the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability domains that influence the acceptability of health interventions. Results: Perimenopausal women expressed fear and distrust towards AI digital health interventions, particularly due to concerns about data privacy and lack of trust of representation of their racial and ethnic backgrounds. AI-driven solutions in women's health faced scepticism due to their perceived lack of relevance and effectiveness. Conclusion: Addressing issues of representation and improving trust in AI technologies are essential to enhance trust, improve engagement and reduce digital health inequalities.
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.