ArticleDigital health
Use of digital health interventions by outdoor workplaces in Australia: A focus on skin cancer prevention interventions.
Article in Digital health. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Understanding digital health interventions (DHIs) from the user perspective is essential for developing best-practice, consumer-informed solutions. Objective: Australia has the highest incidence of skin cancer globally, yet awareness of how DHIs can mitigate its impact remains limited. This study explored the views of outdoor workplaces and workers in sectors such as construction, recreation, and water utilities across NSW and QLD regarding DHIs that promote sun protection and general wellbeing. Methods: A mixed-methods study recruited 15 outdoor workplaces and 107 workers to complete a REDCap survey using a snowball sampling approach. The survey for workplaces contained 10 closed and 11 open-ended questions. The survey for workers contained 16 closed and seven open-ended questions. Data were analysed using Excel, guided by the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation Behaviour (COM-B) framework to examine links between worker capability, opportunity, motivation, and awareness of DHIs. Results: Almost all participants (98/107; 91.6% outdoor workers) reported to have no or only limited exposure to digital health interventions that promote skin cancer awareness and sun exposure recommendations. Very few outdoor workplaces (6/15; 40%) and outdoor workers (21/107; 19.6%) had used other general health and wellbeing-focused digital health interventions. Outdoor workers raised they have very little understanding or awareness of what digital health interventions are, how they could be used and how individuals and workplaces can benefit from it. Outdoor workers raised their need for design elements that are specific to their work setting and environment. Conclusion: Findings suggest that outdoor workplaces need to consider implementing targeted digital health interventions to facilitate behaviour change to address a range of outdoor worker needs. Review of current digital health intervention design models, frameworks and strategies need to be undertaken for priority population groups such as outdoor workers. Current interventions do not appear to address user needs.
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.