MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2898560267 · doi:10.2196/10117

Perceptions and Acceptance of mHealth in Patients With Cardiovascular Diseases: A Cross-Sectional Study

2018· article· en· W2898560267 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jie Jiang, Qin Zhu, Yimei Zheng, Yajing Zhu, Yuxi Li, Yong Huo

Notice bibliographique

RevueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2018
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCross-sectional studymHealthMedicinePerceptionPsychologyPsychological interventionNursingPathology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mobile health (mHealth)-a method of assisting long-term care in patients with chronic cardiovascular diseases (CVDs)-is gaining popularity in China, mainly owing to the large number of patients and limited clinical resources. Patients of different ages have varying needs for CVD management. However, evidence regarding how age influences Chinese CVD patients' use and perceptions of mHealth is limited. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore age-related differences among Chinese patients with CVD regarding their use and perceptions of mHealth and to determine the factors that influence this population's willingness to use mHealth technologies. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of patients with chronic CVDs in a tertiary hospital in Beijing using a new questionnaire designed by the investigators. Participants were sourced using nonproportional quota-sampling methods, being recruited consecutively in each sampling category (age 18-49, 50-64, 65-74, and ≥75 years, with at least 25 men and 25 women in each age group). The survey consisted of 5 parts, including sociodemographic profile and medical history; current disease management situation; self-evaluation of disease management; current usage of mobile and internet technology (IT); and willingness to use an mHealth solution to perform disease self-management. Responses were compared among the 4 age groups as well as between patients who were willing to use mHealth solutions and those who were not. Multivariate logistic regression model was used to identify predictors of willingness to use mHealth for self-management. RESULTS: Overall, 231 patients (124 men) completed the questionnaire; of these, 53 were aged 18-49 years, 66 were aged 50-64 years, 54 were aged 65-74 years, and 58 were aged ≥75 years. Patients in the older cohorts visited hospitals more often than did those in the younger cohorts (P<.001), and they also showed lower technology skills regarding the use of mobile or internet devices (P<.001) and searched for health-related information on the internet less often (P<.001). In addition, 68.0% (157/231) of the patients showed interest in using mHealth solution to manage their disease; of these, 40.8% (64/157) were aged 65 years. Patients who were more willing to use mHealth solution to manage their diseases were younger (P<.001), more educated (P<.001), still working (P=.001), possessed higher skill regarding mobile or internet device use (P<.001), and more frequently searched for health information on the internet (P<.001). Finally, multivariate logistic regression showed that IT skill was the single indicator (P=.003) of willingness to use mHealth, not age. CONCLUSIONS: Although age is associated with the use of mobile or internet devices, the sole indicator of mHealth use for self-management was participants' IT skills. Education regarding the use of mobile devices and development of easy-to-use software might improve the acceptance of mHealth solutions among older patient populations.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Études des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,009
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,046
Tête enseignante GPT0,441
Écart entre enseignants0,395 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations52
Publié2018
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJMIR mhealth and uhealthMême sujetMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsTravaux en français237 207