SynthesisBMJ open2026
Patient experiences with digital health interventions in self-management of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: a systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesDigital health interventions (DHIs) provide great potential for the implementation of self-management strategies in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). In order to promote adoption of such tools, it is important to understand patients' perspectives with those interventions. This study aimed to meta-synthesise qualitative data to explore patients' experiences with and perceptions of DHIs facilitating self-management strategies.
designA qualitative meta-synthesis and systematic review following the Enhancing Transparency of Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research (ENTREQ) statement. DATA SOURCES: Medline (via Pubmed), EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO were searched. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Peer-reviewed qualitative or mixed-method studies reporting patients' experiences, perceptions, preferences, acceptances, satisfaction, benefits and workloads of asynchronous or hybrid digital health interventions, limited to patients over 18 years old and English articles. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: A data extraction form in Excel was developed. The text in the findings or results section, the quotes and the supplementary materials underwent thematic synthesis to derive themes. Methodological quality was assessed with the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist.
resultsA total of 5517 records were identified via an initial search on 24
conclusionsRMD patients preferred digital health interventions as an adjunct to traditional care, not as a replacement. Subjective preferences of patients and their request for healthcare professionals (HCPs) involvement should be taken into account to improve the adoption and integration of DHI in RMD routine care. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Pre-published protocol of this systematic review was uploaded on Zenodo with https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8207717.
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.