Observational studyJMIR human factors2026
Patient Experiences of Digital Technology Use in Interstitial Lung Disease (PRODIGY-ILD Study): Qualitative Study Using Reflexive Thematic Analysis.
Observational study in JMIR human factors, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Digital health technology enables collection of continuous physiological and behavioral data from participants in clinical trials. This supports hybrid trial designs, potentially reducing clinic visits and participant burden for patient monitoring. Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is characterized by an unpredictable clinical course, creating a need for new treatments and more sensitive approaches to assessing treatment effectiveness, disease progression, and clinically meaningful trial end points. Objective: This study aimed to explore the experiences of individuals with ILD using digital tools in a clinical study to inform digital health-enabled clinical research. Methods: This qualitative study was conducted within the PRODIGY-ILD (Predicting Outcomes using Digital Technology in Interstitial Lung Disease) cohort, a prospective observational study using wearable devices and electronic patient-reported outcome measures for a planned 3 years of longitudinal monitoring. Participants were recruited from a specialist outpatient ILD clinic. A topic guide was developed iteratively, and individual semistructured interviews were conducted remotely via Zoom (Zoom Video Communications, Inc) and/or telephone, audio-recorded, and transcribed. Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis with NVivo software (Lumivero). Results: Fifteen of the final 20 participants recruited to the PRODIGY-ILD study consented and completed interviews. Four key themes were identified, highlighting how trust, digital literacy, participant-initiated engagement with data, and illness burden shape sustained participation in digital health-enabled clinical research: (1) trust and altruism override data concerns: confidence in researchers' data handling and a desire to contribute enabled data sharing; (2) navigating digital tools: friction and flexibility: digital literacy, usability, and device compatibility varied, but participants were able to use workarounds to maintain engagement; (3) participant-initiated engagement with wearable data: participants moved from passive to active engagement, in many cases integrating devices into daily routines; and (4) life-limiting illness as a constraint on digital trial participation: managing symptoms and severe comorbidities reduces motivation and engagement with study technology. Conclusions: Despite participants' motivations to contribute data to research, engagement was shaped by usability, participant-initiated engagement, and the constraints of living with chronic illness. There is a need for patient-centered design, tailored support, and flexible trial procedures to optimize adherence in digital health-enabled clinical research.
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.