MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408864237 · doi:10.1371/journal.pdig.0000772

The behavioural and cognitive impacts of digital educational interventions in the emergency department: A systematic review

2025· review· en· W4408864237 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePLOS Digital Health · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionEmergency departmentCochrane LibraryMEDLINEMedicineSystematic reviewCognitionRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisPsychologyNursingPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ensuring patients and their caregivers understand the health information they receive is an important part of every clinical visit. Digital educational interventions like video discharge instructions, follow-up text messaging, or interactive web-based modules (WBMs) have the potential to improve information retention and influence behaviour. This study aims to systematically evaluate the impact of these interventions on patient and caregiver cognition and behaviour, as well as identify the characteristics of successful interventions and observe how success is measured. In December of 2022, a systematic literature search was conducted in several databases (Cochrane, Embase, MEDLINE (Ovid), Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between 2012 and 2022. In 2024, an identical search was performed for articled published between 2022 and 2024. Studies testing patient- and caregiver-facing digital educational interventions in the emergency department for behavioural and cognitive outcomes were included. Data from 35 eligible studies encompassing 12,410 participants were analyzed and assessed for bias using the Cochrane RoB2.0 tool. Video was used in 22 studies (63%), making it the most common modality. Seventy-three percent (16/22) of these studies reported statistically significant improvements in their primary outcomes. Text messaging was used in eight studies, with two (25%) reporting significant improvement in their primary outcomes. WBMs and apps were used in seven studies, 71% (5/7) of which reported statistically significant improvements in primary outcomes. Statistically significant improvements in cognitive outcomes were reported in 64% (18/28) of applicable studies, compared with 17% (4/23) for behavioural outcomes. The results suggest that digital educational interventions can positively impact cognitive outcomes in the emergency department. Video, WBM, and app modalities appear particularly effective. However, digital educational interventions may not yet effectively change behaviour. Establishing guidelines for evaluating the quality of digital educational interventions, and the formal adoption of existing reporting guidelines, could improve study quality and consistency in this emerging field. Registration The study is registered with PROSPERO ID #CRD42023338771.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.704

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.161
GPT teacher head0.530
Teacher spread0.369 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it