ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2024
A Computationally-guided Qualitative Analysis to Understand User Experiences with Different Types of Mobile Personal Health Records.
Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2024. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mobile personal health records (mPHR) are smartphone apps that grant patients portable and continuous access to their medical records, thereby increasing the potential for patients to play an active role in managing their health. An extensive body of literature has focused on understanding user experiences with web-based tethered PHRs (i.e., patient portals) offered by healthcare organizations. However, patients' opinions of smartphone-based PHRs have received less attention. To address this gap, we used a computationally-guided qualitative analysis approach to analyze user reviews of six tethered and four interconnected mPHR apps available on both Google Play and Apple app stores. This approach resulted in identifying dimensions of user experiences related to usability, usefulness, and important features to users. Our findings reveal many similarities in user experiences for HCO-tethered and HCO-independent interconnected PHRs. However, there are some differences in user experiences between the types of PHRs and the different devices and platforms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40417496PMC12099338What 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.