ArticleJMIR formative research2025
Clinical Usefulness of a Smartphone-Based 6-Minute Walk Test in a Hospital Outpatient Clinic Within the Constraints of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Mixed Methods Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The 6-minute walk test (6MWT) measures exercise capacity in cardiorespiratory, neurological, and musculoskeletal conditions. It consists of observing how far a patient can walk in 6 minutes and is usually performed in a corridor in a clinic. During the COVID-19 pandemic, as health care systems cancelled nonurgent outpatient appointments, many tests were conducted online. At Oxford University Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, patients followed up on by cardiovascular outpatient clinics were asked to use the open-source Timed Walk app to perform the 6MWT in their community as a substitute for the regular tests in the clinic. Objective: This study aimed to assess the clinical usefulness of the app within the context of the pandemic. Methods: Consented patients were invited to perform a 6MWT outdoors using the app at least once a month and report the results through periodic telephone calls and visits. Clinical decisions made for the same cohort were registered, with a focus on the effect of the app in supporting decision-making. Data collected through the app during the study period were compared with 6MWTs performed in the prepandemic period. Results: This study was conducted between October 2021 and December 2022. A total of 55 participants consented (n=25, 45% female; mean age 44.80, SD 17.49 y). In total, 741 events were logged. A total of 51 medical decisions were made for 25 patients; in 41% (21/51) of the decisions, the app played a role, affecting 44% (11/25) of the patients. Between 2018 and 2022, a cohort of 49 patients for whom data were available performed 63 6MWTs in the clinic (18 in 2021), whereas the same patients performed 605 tests using the app in 2022 (ie, October 2021 to December 2022). Conclusions: The use of the Timed Walk app for remote 6MWTs allowed clinicians to obtain frequent and objective indications of the status of the patients during the pandemic, compensating for the absence of regular clinic appointments and providing 33 times more tests than in the prepandemic period. These tests supported approximately half of the clinical decisions made regarding the consented patients, showing that the app is useful in clinical practice.
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.