| Literature DB >> 30578179 |
Quynh Pham1,2, Gary Graham2, Chitra Lalloo1,3, Plinio P Morita1,4, Emily Seto1,2, Jennifer N Stinson1,3,5,6, Joseph A Cafazzo1,2,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mobile health (mHealth) apps for pediatric chronic conditions are growing in availability and challenge investigators to conduct rigorous evaluations that keep pace with mHealth innovation. Traditional research methods are poorly suited to operationalize the agile, iterative trials required to evidence and optimize these digitally mediated interventions.Entities:
Keywords: analytics; chronic disease; engagement; log data; mobile apps; mobile health
Year: 2018 PMID: 30578179 PMCID: PMC6320392 DOI: 10.2196/11447
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth ISSN: 2291-5222 Impact factor: 4.773
Analytic indicators of effective engagement with iCanCope.
| Analytic indicator | Definition | |
| How are users doing on pain-related outcomes? | Raw and mean pain intensity, pain interference, sleep, mood, energy, and physical activity check-in scores generated over time | |
| Are users recording positive or negative check-in trends? | Number of positive and negative trends triggered | |
| Which pain-related outcome scores are users reporting the most? | Number of scores reported per check-in score response | |
| Which pain-related outcome scores are most users reporting? | Number of users reporting scores per check-in score response | |
| How many check-ins are being completed daily? | Number of check-ins completed every day | |
| How many check-ins have been completed since study launch? | Number of check-ins completed in the last 90 days | |
| How many users have completed at least one check-in a day, every day, over the last 7 days? | Number of users with ≥1 check-in completed in a day, every day | |
| How many users have not completed a check-in for 7 consecutive days? | No check-ins logged for 7 consecutive days | |
| How long did it take for users to complete their first check-in? | Time between account creation and first check-in completed | |
| Which 10 users have completed the most check-ins? | Identity of user and number of check-ins completed | |
| How many check-ins were completed this week versus last week? | Number of check-ins completed this week and number of check-ins completed last week | |
| Are users completing set goals? | Number of goals set and completed | |
| What types of goals are users setting the most? | Number of activity, sleep, energy, mood, and social goals set | |
| What types of goals are most users setting? | Number of users setting activity, sleep, energy, mood, and social goals | |
| How long did it take for users to complete their first goal? | Time between account creation and first goal created | |
| How many users have engaged with the community features? | Number of users who liked or made a post on the community feature | |
| What were the top 5 community questions with the most responses? | Content of community questions and number of responses | |
| What are the top 10 most popular library articles? | Content of library articles and number of reads | |
| How many users accessed the history feature at least once? | Number of users who clicked on the history feature | |
| What symptoms are users reviewing in the history feature? | Contents and number of history pages clicked | |
| How many users have activated an | Number of users registered on the study server | |
| How many users have logged any activity in the last 7 days? | Number of users who generated ≥1 event on the study server in the last 7 days | |
| How many users have logged any activity in the last 24 hours? | Number of users who generated ≥1 event on the study server in the last 24 hours | |
| Where in the world are users accessing the app? | Geolocation of user internet protocol addresses | |
| How far have users progressed in the study? | Numbers of days elapsed since account creation | |
Figure 1APEEE system architecture. APEEE: Analytics Platform to Evaluate Effective Engagement.
Figure 2APEEE dashboard with a subset of analytic indicators of effective engagement with iCanCope. APEEE: Analytics Platform to Evaluate Effective Engagement.
Figure 3The analytic indicator for “where in the world are users accessing iCanCope?,” visualized through APEEE as a choropleth map covering 5 continents. APEEE: Analytics Platform to Evaluate Effective Engagement.
Figure 4The analytic indicator for “where in the world are users accessing iCanCope?,” visualized through APEEE as a choropleth map covering the greater Toronto area in Ontario, Canada. APEEE: Analytics Platform to Evaluate Effective Engagement.
Figure 5The analytic indicator for “what types of goals are users setting the most?,” visualized through APEEE as a horizontal bar chart. APEEE: Analytics Platform to Evaluate Effective Engagement.
Figure 6The analytic indicator for “what types of goals are most users setting?,” visualized through APEEE as a horizontal bar chart. APEEE: Analytics Platform to Evaluate Effective Engagement.
Figure 7The analytic indicator for “how many check-ins are being completed daily?,” visualized through APEEE as a histogram with 3 layered graphs. APEEE: Analytics Platform to Evaluate Effective Engagement.
Figure 8The analytic indicator for “are users adhering to the check-in protocol?,” visualized through APEEE as a line graph. APEEE: Analytics Platform to Evaluate Effective Engagement.
Figure 9The analytic indicator for “Are intervention and control users reporting different pain scores?,” visualized through APEEE as a line graph. APEEE: Analytics Platform to Evaluate Effective Engagement.