Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42013368›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2026

Factors Influencing the Use of Mobile Apps and Wearables: Pre- and Post-Surgery Quality of Life Assessment Study.

Laëtitia Gosetto, Emma Cockcroft, Allan Berrocal, Aria Nouri, Ian Porter, Enrico Tessitore, Philippe Bijlenga, Al-Amin Kassam, Jonathan Evans, Jose M Valderas and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Laëtitia GosettoQuality of Life Lab, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-9432-2160
Emma CockcroftDepartment of Health & Community Sciences, Exeter Collaboration for Academic Primary Care (APEx), University of Exeter, Smeall building, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3798-9492
Allan BerrocalQuality of Life Lab, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-5829-9752
Aria NouriNeurosurgery Division, University Hospitals Geneva Medical Center, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-4965-3059
Ian PorterDepartment of Health & Community Sciences, Exeter Collaboration for Academic Primary Care (APEx), University of Exeter, Smeall building, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2440-8727
Enrico TessitoreNeurosurgery Division, University Hospitals Geneva Medical Center, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-7116-6302
Philippe BijlengaNeurosurgery Division, University Hospitals Geneva Medical Center, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-3586-2757
Al-Amin KassamRoyal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Exeter, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7926-3289
Jonathan EvansDepartment of Health & Community Sciences, Exeter Collaboration for Academic Primary Care (APEx), University of Exeter, Smeall building, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0090-1012
Jose M ValderasDepartment of Health & Community Sciences, Exeter Collaboration for Academic Primary Care (APEx), University of Exeter, Smeall building, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9299-1555
Katarzyna WacQuality of Life Lab, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-8060-399X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Quality of life (QoL) is an important surgical outcome, commonly assessed through self-reports, and has the potential to be enhanced by objective information from personal technologies such as smartphone apps and wearables. Understanding patients' perspectives on this application of personal technologies is scarce. Objective: This study aimed to identify operational aspects of smartphone- and wearable-based assessments, as well as human and operational factors that may influence the acceptability of already owned (mostly smartphone) or new (mostly wearable) technologies by patients for pre- and post-surgery QoL assessments. Methods: Through purposive sampling, 41 patients from 3 health care centers in Switzerland, the United States, and the United Kingdom, who were undergoing or scheduled for surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM), liver transplantation, or total hip replacement, were interviewed about their perceptions of QoL, current use of smartphones, health apps, and wearables for self-management and their views on using these technologies to assess QoL before and after surgery. Results: Across the 3 studies (n=41), most (n=36) patients reported improved QoL after surgery, mainly due to reduced pain and fatigue and regained autonomy, while a few patients with DCM reported no change (n=2) or worsening (n=1). Patients were generally comfortable using smartphones and tablets, but few (n=4) used them for health management. Wearables were perceived differently across groups: they were well accepted in transplant@US, moderately in hip@UK, and least in myelopathy@CH. Many patients with DCM found wearables "useless," believing they added little to their self-awareness or recovery and could not replace human clinical judgment. Others expressed concerns about privacy, complexity, notifications, and battery life, while some acknowledged their motivational value when the data were clearly interpreted. Despite varying acceptance levels, most participants said they would consider using such devices if they contributed to research or improved care. Conclusions: Given a mostly negative attitude of patients toward wearables, we discuss the use of smartphone-based automated logging of physical functioning (sleep and physical activity) instead. Such logging may be less accurate than a dedicated wearable, but it may be accurate enough to measure their pre- and post-surgery physical functioning changes. Additionally, a smartphone has the advantage of being already well integrated into the daily life of patients from the perspective of its functionality and the patients' routines, contrary to wearable devices, which would have been provided to the patients in the context of pre- and post-surgery clinical care and require additional attention for their continuous wear, charging, and data synchronization, among others.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsQuality of LifeWearable Electronic DevicesAdultAgedDigital HealthFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesSwitzerlandUnited KingdomUnited Statesdegenerative cervical myelopathyliver transplantmHealthmobile applicationsquality of lifeself-managementsmartphonesurgerytechnology-reported outcomestelehealthtotal hip replacementwearables

Identifiers

PMID42013368
PMCPMC13099019

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.