Evidence mapPaperPMID 33388049Full record

SynthesisBMC medical informatics and decision making2021

Effectiveness of IT-based interventions on self-management in adult kidney transplant recipients: a systematic review.

Saeid Eslami, Farnaz Khoshrounejad, Reza Golmakani, Zhila Taherzadeh, Fariba Tohidinezhad, Sayyed Mostafa Mostafavi, Raheleh Ganjali

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Augmented Reality: A Transformative Tool for Enhancing Self-Care in Kidney Transplant Recipients.International journal of community based nursing and midwifery · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Saeid EslamiDepartment of Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Azadi Street, Mashhad, Iran.
Farnaz KhoshrounejadDepartment of Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Azadi Street, Mashhad, Iran.
Reza GolmakaniDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Doctor Shariati Hospital, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Zhila TaherzadehNeurogenic Inflammation Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Fariba TohidinezhadDepartment of Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Azadi Street, Mashhad, Iran.
Sayyed Mostafa MostafaviDepartment of Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Azadi Street, Mashhad, Iran.
Raheleh GanjaliDepartment of Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Azadi Street, Mashhad, Iran. Ganjalir2@mums.ac.ir.ORCID 0000-0003-4584-9692
Mashhad University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundKidney transplant outcomes are broadly associated with transplant recipients' capacity in following a complex and continuous self-management regimen. Health information technology has the potential to empower patients. This systematic review aimed to determine the impacts of IT-based interventions for self-management in kidney transplant recipients.

methodsA comprehensive investigation was performed in MEDLINE (via PubMed) and EMBASE (via Scopus) in April 2019. Eligible studies were the randomized controlled trials which aimed to design an automated IT-based intervention. All English papers including adult kidney transplant recipients were included. To assess the clinical trial's quality, Cochrane Collaboration's assessment tool was employed. The articles were integrated based on category of outcomes, characteristics of interventions, and their impact. The interventions were classified based on the used IT-based tools, including smart phones, coverage tools, computer systems, and a combination of several tools. The impact of interventions was defined as: (1) positive effect (i.e. statistically significant), and (2) no effect (i.e. not statistically significant).

resultsA total of 2392 articles were retrieved and eight publications were included for full-text analysis. Interventions include those involving the use of computerized systems (3 studies), smart phone application (3 studies), and multiple components (2 studies). The studies evaluated 30 outcomes in total, including 24 care process and 6 clinical outcomes. In 18 (80%) out of 30 outcomes, interventions had a statistically significant positive effect, 66% in process and 33% in clinical outcomes.

conclusionsIT-based interventions (e.g. mobile health applications, wearable devices, and computer systems) can improve self-management in kidney transplant recipients (including clinical and care process outcomes). However, further evaluation studies are required to quantify the impact of IT-based self-management interventions on short- and long-term clinical outcomes as well as health care costs and patients' quality of life.

Indexed as

Kidney TransplantationSelf-ManagementText MessagingAdultHumansQuality of LifeTransplant RecipientsInformation technologyKidney transplantSelf-careSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID33388049
PMCPMC7778800
OpenAlexW3121121855

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.