ArticleFrontiers in psychology2018
A P5 Approach to m-Health: Design Suggestions for Advanced Mobile Health Technology.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Psychosocial factors associated with quality of life in cancer patients undergoing treatment: an umbrella review.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2025Pooled it
- Technology-based self-management interventions for women with breast cancer: a systematic review.Korean journal of women health nursing · 2023Pooled it
- Electronic Health Interventions for Patients With Breast Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2022Pooled it
- eHealth Interventions to Address Sexual Health, Substance Use, and Mental Health Among Men Who Have Sex With Men: Systematic Review and Synthesis of Process Evaluations.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- Cancer Patients' Perception, Acceptance, and Utilization of Artificial Intelligence-Based Emotional Distress Assessment Tools: A Scoping Review.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Neuropsychological and psychosocial assessment of small and non-small lung cancer patients: a study protocol.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- A Systematic Review of the Use of mHealth in Oral Health Education among Older Adults.Dentistry journal · 2023Review
- Capacity Building, Knowledge Enhancement, and Consultative Processes for Development of a Digital Tool (Ni-kshay SETU) to Support the Management of Patients with Tuberculosis: Exploratory Qualitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Problems and Barriers Related to the Use of Digital Health Applications: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Value attributed to text-based archives generated by artificial intelligence.Royal Society open science · 2023Article
- Understanding the Antecedents and Effects of mHealth App Use in Pandemics: A Sequential Mixed-Method Investigation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Barriers and Supports in eHealth Implementation among People with Chronic Cardiovascular Ailments: Integrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
- The patient as a prosumer of healthcare: insights from a bibliometric-interpretive review.Journal of health organization and management · 2022Article
- Adapting an Evidence-Based e-Learning Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Program Into a Mobile App for People Experiencing Gambling-Related Problems: Formative Study.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- mHealth Applications to Monitor Lifestyle Behaviors and Circadian Rhythm in Clinical Settings: Current Perspective and Future Directions.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Understanding the Antecedents of the Routine Use of Mobile Health Services: A Person-Technology-Health Framework.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Editorial: On the "Human" in Human-Artificial Intelligence Interaction.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- In the eye of a quiet storm: A critical incident study on the quarantine experience during the coronavirus pandemic.PloS one · 2021Article
- ERS Presidential Summit 2018: multimorbidities and the ageing population.ERJ open research · 2019Review
- How to Train Your Health: Sports as a Resource to Improve Cognitive Abilities in Cancer Patients.Frontiers in psychology · 2019Article
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
In recent years, technology has been developed as an important resource for health care management, especially in regard to chronic conditions. In the broad field of eHealth, mobile technology (mHealth) is increasingly used to empower patients not only in disease management but also in the achievement of positive experiences and experiential growth. mHealth tools are considered powerful because, unlike more traditional Internet-based tools, they allow patients to be continuously monitored and followed by their own mobile devices and to have continual access to resources (e.g., mobile apps or functions) supporting health care management activities. However, the literature has shown that, in many cases, such technology not accepted and/or adopted in the long term by its users. To address this issue, this article reviews the main factors influencing mHealth technology acceptance/adoption in health care. Finally, based on the main aspects emerging from the review, we propose an innovative approach to mHealth design and implementation, namely P5 mHealth. Relying on the P5 approach to medicine and health care, this approach provides design suggestions to address mHealth adoption issues already at the initial stages of development of the technologies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.