Patients Experiences of Using Smartphone Apps to Manage their Gestational Diabetes Diagnosis: A Systematic Review - protocol (version 1)
Anis, A.; Plüddemann, A.; Choksey, A.; Portwood, C.; Mitra, V.; Heneghan, C.
Show abstract
BackgroundGestational diabetes is a strong predictor of type 2 diabetes onset. However, women who make healthy dietary and lifestyle choices can significantly reduce their risk. There is a need to understand the factors facilitating or preventing women from using smartphone apps that may encourage these behaviours. MethodsWe plan to conduct a systematic review of patient experiences when using mobile health applications to manage gestational diabetes. We will include primary studies of qualitative data around patient experiences of using these applications, as well as the barriers and facilitators to using technologies. We will search the following electronic databases: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Global Health, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), AMED and CINAHL and manually search the reference lists of included studies. We will include primary studies involving direct user interviews and where the results have been analysed using qualitative methods. To assess the quality of included studies, we will use the CASP qualitative research checklist. Expected resultsWe intend to use summary tables to report the characteristics of the study population, the overarching themes that emerged, and recommendations for research and practice.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Wearable Sensing in Eating Episode Monitoring: An Updated Systematic Review Protocol 93%
- The iDiabetes Platform: Enhanced Phenotyping of Patients with Diabetes for Precision Diagnosis, Prognosis and Treatment- study protocol for a cluster-randomised controlled study 93%
- Scalability of mobile technology interventions in the prevention and management of HIV among adolescents in low- and middle-income countries: protocol for a systematic review 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Scoping Review Protocol on Integration of mobile-linked POC diagnostics in community-based healthcare: User Experience 95%
- The Impact of Clinical Audits on Improving the Effectiveness of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) CARE in Primary Health Centers. A Comprehensive Pre-post analysis through Multi-layered Intervention: The ICAE-DM CARE study protocol 95%
- Impact of health systems interventions in primary health settings on type 2 diabetes care and health outcomes among adults in West Africa: a systematic review protocol 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Wearables and smartphones for modifiable risk factors in metabolic health: a scoping review protocol 92%
- Strategies and Tools for electronic health records and physician workflow alignment: A scoping review protocol 92%
- Scientific hypothesis generation process in clinical research: a secondary data analytic tool versus experience study protocol 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Home monitoring of HbA1c in diabetes mellitus: A protocol for systematic review and narrative synthesis on reliability, accuracy, and patient acceptability 95%
- A mixed-methods evaluation of patients’ views on primary care multi-disciplinary teams in Scotland 90%
- Patients’ perspectives on ecologically sustainable healthcare in general practice 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Improving cardiovascular health in patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm: Development of the Cardiovascular risk reduction in patients with aneurysms (CRISP) behaviour change intervention 92%
- The MultimorbiditY COllaborative Medication Review And DEcision Making (MyComrade) study: A protocol for a cross-border pilot cluster randomised controlled trial 92%
- Real-time Auditory Feedback for Improving Gait and Walking in People with Parkinson’s Disease: A Pilot and Feasibility Trial 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.