Back

A Qualitative Study of Patient and Healthcare Provider Perspectives on Mobile Health Assessments for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy

Singh, P.; Gonuguntla, S.; Chen, E.; Pradhan, A.; Becker, I.; Xu, N.; Steel, B.; Arkam, F.; Yakdan, S.; Benedict, B.; Naveed, H.; Wang, W.; Guo, W.; Wilt, Z.; Badhiwala, J.; Hafez, D.; Ogunlade, J.; Ray, W. Z.; Ghogawala, Z.; Kelleher, C.; Greenberg, J. K.

2026-03-05 health informatics
10.64898/2026.03.04.26347622 medRxiv
Show abstract

Structured Abstract (for clinical articles and laboratory investigations)O_ST_ABSObjectiveC_ST_ABSEvaluating and monitoring patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) remains a challenge due to limited tools for assessing objective neurological disability longitudinally and in the home environment. Given their prevalence and low cost, mobile health (mHealth), and specifically smartphone technologies offer a promising approach to fill this gap. This study explored stakeholder perspectives on the role of mHealth in CSM monitoring to inform development of a smartphone-based assessment application. MethodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 patients with CSM and 14 healthcare providers (spine surgeons, physical therapists, and occupational therapists). Interviews explored current assessment practices, perceived limitations, and attitudes toward mHealth integration. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. ResultsTwo major themes emerged from provider interviews: (1) diagnosing and monitoring CSM is challenging due to limitations in current tools, and (2) mHealth presents significant opportunities but requires thoughtful integration. Providers described current methods and technologies, clinical signs and symptoms, and challenges evaluating patients. Current tools were viewed as inadequate for precision medicine, with inter-rater variability and inability to capture real-world function. Within the second theme, providers identified ways mHealth could improve care, challenges for integration, and practical implementation considerations. Patients expressed strong interest in objective, longitudinal monitoring of gait, dexterity, and daily function. ConclusionsStakeholders recognized substantial potential for mHealth to address unmet needs in CSM assessment. Successful implementation will require intuitive design, electronic medical record integration, and attention to accessibility. These findings provide a foundation for user-centered development of digital health tools in CSM care.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 11%
17.5%
2
JMIR Formative Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.4%
3
DIGITAL HEALTH
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.2%
4
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.4%
5
Frontiers in Digital Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.8%
6
BMJ Health & Care Informatics
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.0%
7
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
28 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.0%
50% of probability mass above
8
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.7%
9
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 7%
2.7%
10
JMIR Medical Informatics
17 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.6%
11
JAMIA Open
37 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.4%
12
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 48%
2.4%
13
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
14
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
15
Emergency Medicine Journal
20 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
16
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
17
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.9%
18
BMJ Open Quality
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.8%
19
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
20
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
21
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
45 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
22
International Journal of Medical Informatics
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
23
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
24
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
25
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
26
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.6%
27
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.6%
28
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
29
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
15 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.6%
30
Sensors
39 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%