Exploring the perspectives of health care professionals on digital health technologies in pediatric care and rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Digital health technologies are increasingly used by healthcare professionals working in pediatric hospital and rehabilitation settings. Multiple factors may affect the implementation and use of digital health technologies in these settings. However, such factors have not been identified in a multidisciplinary, pediatric context. The objective of this study was to describe actual use and to identify the factors that promote or hinder the intention to use digital health technologies (mobile learning applications, virtual/augmented reality, serious games, robotic devices, telehealth applications, computerized assessment tools, and wearables) among pediatric healthcare professionals. Methods An online survey evaluating opinions, current use, and future intentions to use digital health technologies was completed by 108 professionals at one of Canada’s largest pediatric institutes. Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare the attitudes of healthcare professionals who intend to increase their use of digital health technologies and those who do not. Linear regression analyses were used to determine predictors of usage success. Results Healthcare professionals reported mostly using mobile and tablet learning applications (n = 43, 38.1%), telehealth applications (n = 49, 43.4%), and computerized assessment tools (n = 33, 29.2%). Attitudes promoting the intention to increase the use of digital health technologies varied according to technology type. Healthcare professionals who wished to increase their use of digital health technologies reported a more positive attitude regarding benefits in clinical practice and patient care, but were also more critical of potential negative impacts on patient-professional relationships. Ease of use (β = 0.374; p = 0.020) was a significant predictor of more favorable usage success. The range of obstacles encountered was also a significant predictor (β = 0.342; p = 0.032) of less favorable evaluation of usage success. Specific factors that hinder successful usage are lack of training (β = 0.303; p = 0.033) and inadequate infrastructure (β = 0.342; p = 0.032). Conclusions When working with children, incorporating digital health technologies can be effective for motivation and adherence. However, it is crucial to ensure these tools are implemented properly. The findings of this study underscore the importance of addressing training and infrastructure needs when elaborating technology-specific strategies for multidisciplinary adoption of digital health technologies in pediatric settings.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".