Cargando…
Systematic review and evaluation of web-accessible tools for management of diabetes and related cardiovascular risk factors by patients and healthcare providers
OBJECTIVE: To identify and evaluate the effectiveness, clinical usefulness, sustainability, and usability of web-compatible diabetes-related tools. DATA SOURCES: Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, world wide web. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included if they de...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Group
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3384097/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22215057 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000307 |
_version_ | 1782236674191785984 |
---|---|
author | Yu, Catherine H Bahniwal, Robinder Laupacis, Andreas Leung, Eman Orr, Michael S Straus, Sharon E |
author_facet | Yu, Catherine H Bahniwal, Robinder Laupacis, Andreas Leung, Eman Orr, Michael S Straus, Sharon E |
author_sort | Yu, Catherine H |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To identify and evaluate the effectiveness, clinical usefulness, sustainability, and usability of web-compatible diabetes-related tools. DATA SOURCES: Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, world wide web. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included if they described an electronic audiovisual tool used as a means to educate patients, care givers, or clinicians about diabetes management and assessed a psychological, behavioral, or clinical outcome. DATA EXTRACTION: Study abstraction and evaluation for clinical usefulness, sustainability, and usability were performed by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: Of 12616 citations and 1541 full-text articles reviewed, 57 studies met inclusion criteria. Forty studies used experimental designs (25 randomized controlled trials, one controlled clinical trial, 14 before–after studies), and 17 used observational designs. Methodological quality and ratings for clinical usefulness and sustainability were variable, and there was a high prevalence of usability errors. Tools showed moderate but inconsistent effects on a variety of psychological and clinical outcomes including HbA1c and weight. Meta-regression of adequately reported studies (12 studies, 2731 participants) demonstrated that, although the interventions studied resulted in positive outcomes, this was not moderated by clinical usefulness nor usability. LIMITATION: This review is limited by the number of accessible tools, exclusion of tools for mobile devices, study quality, and the use of non-validated scales. CONCLUSION: Few tools were identified that met our criteria for effectiveness, usefulness, sustainability, and usability. Priority areas include identifying strategies to minimize website attrition and enabling patients and clinicians to make informed decisions about website choice by encouraging reporting of website quality indicators. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3384097 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | BMJ Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-33840972012-06-29 Systematic review and evaluation of web-accessible tools for management of diabetes and related cardiovascular risk factors by patients and healthcare providers Yu, Catherine H Bahniwal, Robinder Laupacis, Andreas Leung, Eman Orr, Michael S Straus, Sharon E J Am Med Inform Assoc Review OBJECTIVE: To identify and evaluate the effectiveness, clinical usefulness, sustainability, and usability of web-compatible diabetes-related tools. DATA SOURCES: Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, world wide web. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included if they described an electronic audiovisual tool used as a means to educate patients, care givers, or clinicians about diabetes management and assessed a psychological, behavioral, or clinical outcome. DATA EXTRACTION: Study abstraction and evaluation for clinical usefulness, sustainability, and usability were performed by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: Of 12616 citations and 1541 full-text articles reviewed, 57 studies met inclusion criteria. Forty studies used experimental designs (25 randomized controlled trials, one controlled clinical trial, 14 before–after studies), and 17 used observational designs. Methodological quality and ratings for clinical usefulness and sustainability were variable, and there was a high prevalence of usability errors. Tools showed moderate but inconsistent effects on a variety of psychological and clinical outcomes including HbA1c and weight. Meta-regression of adequately reported studies (12 studies, 2731 participants) demonstrated that, although the interventions studied resulted in positive outcomes, this was not moderated by clinical usefulness nor usability. LIMITATION: This review is limited by the number of accessible tools, exclusion of tools for mobile devices, study quality, and the use of non-validated scales. CONCLUSION: Few tools were identified that met our criteria for effectiveness, usefulness, sustainability, and usability. Priority areas include identifying strategies to minimize website attrition and enabling patients and clinicians to make informed decisions about website choice by encouraging reporting of website quality indicators. BMJ Group 2012-01-03 2012 /pmc/articles/PMC3384097/ /pubmed/22215057 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000307 Text en © 2012, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/legalcode. |
spellingShingle | Review Yu, Catherine H Bahniwal, Robinder Laupacis, Andreas Leung, Eman Orr, Michael S Straus, Sharon E Systematic review and evaluation of web-accessible tools for management of diabetes and related cardiovascular risk factors by patients and healthcare providers |
title | Systematic review and evaluation of web-accessible tools for management of diabetes and related cardiovascular risk factors by patients and healthcare providers |
title_full | Systematic review and evaluation of web-accessible tools for management of diabetes and related cardiovascular risk factors by patients and healthcare providers |
title_fullStr | Systematic review and evaluation of web-accessible tools for management of diabetes and related cardiovascular risk factors by patients and healthcare providers |
title_full_unstemmed | Systematic review and evaluation of web-accessible tools for management of diabetes and related cardiovascular risk factors by patients and healthcare providers |
title_short | Systematic review and evaluation of web-accessible tools for management of diabetes and related cardiovascular risk factors by patients and healthcare providers |
title_sort | systematic review and evaluation of web-accessible tools for management of diabetes and related cardiovascular risk factors by patients and healthcare providers |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3384097/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22215057 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000307 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT yucatherineh systematicreviewandevaluationofwebaccessibletoolsformanagementofdiabetesandrelatedcardiovascularriskfactorsbypatientsandhealthcareproviders AT bahniwalrobinder systematicreviewandevaluationofwebaccessibletoolsformanagementofdiabetesandrelatedcardiovascularriskfactorsbypatientsandhealthcareproviders AT laupacisandreas systematicreviewandevaluationofwebaccessibletoolsformanagementofdiabetesandrelatedcardiovascularriskfactorsbypatientsandhealthcareproviders AT leungeman systematicreviewandevaluationofwebaccessibletoolsformanagementofdiabetesandrelatedcardiovascularriskfactorsbypatientsandhealthcareproviders AT orrmichaels systematicreviewandevaluationofwebaccessibletoolsformanagementofdiabetesandrelatedcardiovascularriskfactorsbypatientsandhealthcareproviders AT straussharone systematicreviewandevaluationofwebaccessibletoolsformanagementofdiabetesandrelatedcardiovascularriskfactorsbypatientsandhealthcareproviders |