Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33735320›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2021

Mobile health technologies supporting colonoscopy preparation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Maria El Bizri, Mariam El Sheikh, Ga Eun Lee, Maida J Sewitch

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Development and validation of a novel scoring system based on a nomogram for predicting inadequate bowel preparation.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. The Reach of Calls and Text Messages for Mailed FIT Outreach in the PROMPT Stepped-Wedge Colorectal Cancer Screening Trial.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors.

Maria El BizriCentre for Outcomes Research & Evaluation, Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Mariam El SheikhCentre for Outcomes Research & Evaluation, Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Ga Eun LeeCentre for Outcomes Research & Evaluation, Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-7684-9014
Maida J SewitchCentre for Outcomes Research & Evaluation, Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9630-6204

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMobile health (mHealth) technologies are innovative solutions for delivering instructions to patients preparing for colonoscopy.

objectiveTo systematically review the literature evaluating the effectiveness of mHealth technologies supporting colonoscopy preparation on patient and clinical outcomes.

methodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effectiveness of mHealth technologies for colonoscopy preparation on patient and clinical outcomes. Two reviewers independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data, and appraised methodological quality using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool. Data were pooled using random effects models and when heterogeneity, assessed using I2, was statistically significant, a qualitative synthesis of the data was performed. Publication bias was assessed using a funnel plot.

resultsTen RCTs (3,383 participants) met inclusion criteria. MHealth interventions included smartphone apps, SMS text messages, videos, camera apps, and a social media app. Outcomes were bowel cleanliness quality, user satisfaction, colonoscopy quality indicators (cecal intubation time, withdrawal time, adenoma detection rate), adherence to diet, and cancellation/no-show rates. MHealth interventions were associated with better bowel cleanliness scores on the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale [standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.57, 95%CI 0.37-0.77, I2 = 60%, p = 0.08] and the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale [SMD -0.39, 95%CI -0.59-0.19, I2 = 45%, p = 0.16], but they were not associated with rates of willingness to repeat the colonoscopy using the same regimen [odds ratio (OR) 1.88, 95%CI 0.85-4.15, I2 = 48%, p = 0.12] or cancellations/no-shows [OR 0.96, 95%CI 0.68-1.35, I2 = 0%]. Most studies showed that adequate bowel preparation, user satisfaction and adherence to diet were better in the intervention groups compared to the control groups, while inconsistent findings were observed for the colonoscopy quality indicators. All trials were at high risk of bias for lack of participant blinding. Visual inspection of a funnel plot revealed publication bias.

conclusionsMHealth technologies show promise as a way to improve bowel cleanliness, but trials to date were of low methodological quality. High-quality research is required to understand the effectiveness of mHealth technologies on colonoscopy outcomes.

Indexed as

ColonoscopyColorectal NeoplasmsHumansMobile ApplicationsPatient Education as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTelemedicineText Messaging

Identifiers

PMID33735320
PMCPMC7971694

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.