Literature DB >> 33576742

Investigator Experiences Using Mobile Technologies in Clinical Research: Qualitative Descriptive Study.

Kevin Christopher McKenna1,2, Cindy Geoghegan3, Teresa Swezey1,2, Brian Perry1,2, William A Wood4,5, Virginia Nido6, Steve L Morin7, Brigid K Grabert5, Zachary P Hallinan2, Amy L Corneli1,2,8.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The successful adoption of mobile technology for use in clinical trials relies on positive reception from key stakeholders, including clinical investigators; however, little information is known about the perspectives of investigators using mobile technologies in clinical trials.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to seek investigators' insights on the advantages and challenges of mobile clinical trials (MCTs); site-level budgetary, training, and other support needs necessary to adequately prepare for and implement MCTs; and the advantages and disadvantages for trial participants using mobile technologies in clinical trials.
METHODS: Using a qualitative descriptive study design, we conducted in-depth interviews with investigators involved in the conduct of MCTs. Data were analyzed using applied thematic analysis.
RESULTS: We interviewed 12 investigators who represented a wide variety of clinical specialties and reported using a wide range of mobile technologies. Investigators most commonly cited 3 advantages of MCTs over traditional clinical trials: more streamlined study operations, remote data capture, and improvement in the quality of studies and data collected. Investigators also reported that MCTs can be designed around the convenience of trial participants, and individuals may be more willing to participate in MCTs because they can take part from their homes. In addition, investigators recognized that MCTs can also involve additional burden for participants and described that operational challenges, technology adoption barriers, uncertainties about data quality, and time burden made MCTs more challenging than traditional clinical trials. Investigators stressed that additional training and dedicated staff effort may be needed to select a particular technology for use in a trial, helping trial participants learn and use the technology, and for staff troubleshooting the technology. Investigators also expressed that sharing data collected in real time with investigators and trial participants is an important aspect of MCTs that warrants consideration and potentially additional training and education.
CONCLUSIONS: Investigator perspectives can inform the use of mobile technologies in future clinical trials by proactively identifying and addressing potential challenges. ©Kevin Christopher McKenna, Cindy Geoghegan, Teresa Swezey, Brian Perry, William A Wood, Virginia Nido, Steve L Morin, Brigid K Grabert, Zachary P Hallinan, Amy L Corneli. Originally published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth (http://mhealth.jmir.org), 12.02.2021.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical research; clinical trial; digital health; digital health technology; mHealth; mobile applications; mobile clinical trials; mobile devices; mobile technology

Year:  2021        PMID: 33576742      PMCID: PMC7910119          DOI: 10.2196/19242

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JMIR Mhealth Uhealth        ISSN: 2291-5222            Impact factor:   4.773


  19 in total

Review 1.  Whatever happened to qualitative description?

Authors:  M Sandelowski
Journal:  Res Nurs Health       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 2.228

2.  What's in a name? Qualitative description revisited.

Authors:  Margarete Sandelowski
Journal:  Res Nurs Health       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 2.228

3.  Mobile Health Interventions for Improving Health Outcomes in Youth: A Meta-analysis.

Authors:  David A Fedele; Christopher C Cushing; Alyssa Fritz; Christina M Amaro; Adrian Ortega
Journal:  JAMA Pediatr       Date:  2017-05-01       Impact factor: 16.193

Review 4.  Mobile technology for medication adherence in people with mood disorders: A systematic review.

Authors:  Kelly Rootes-Murdy; Kara L Glazer; Michael J Van Wert; Francis M Mondimore; Peter P Zandi
Journal:  J Affect Disord       Date:  2017-11-14       Impact factor: 4.839

Review 5.  Reflection on Mobile Applications for Blood Pressure Management: A Systematic Review on Potential Effects and Initiatives.

Authors:  Reyhaneh Mohammadi; Movahhedeh Ayatolahi Tafti; Soodabeh Hoveidamanesh; Reza Ghanavati; Omid Pournik
Journal:  Stud Health Technol Inform       Date:  2018

6.  The feasibility, acceptability, and outcomes of PRIME-D: A novel mobile intervention treatment for depression.

Authors:  Danielle A Schlosser; Timothy R Campellone; Brandy Truong; Joaquin A Anguera; Silvia Vergani; Sophia Vinogradov; Patricia Arean
Journal:  Depress Anxiety       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 6.505

Review 7.  Mobile phone text messaging to improve medication adherence in secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  Alma J Adler; Nicole Martin; Javier Mariani; Carlos D Tajer; Onikepe O Owolabi; Caroline Free; Norma C Serrano; Juan P Casas; Pablo Perel
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-04-29

Review 8.  Preparing for the Future of Rare Diseases.

Authors:  Stephen C Groft; Manuel Posada de la Paz
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2017       Impact factor: 2.622

9.  Patient preferences for using mobile technologies in clinical trials.

Authors:  Brian Perry; Cindy Geoghegan; Li Lin; F Hunter McGuire; Virginia Nido; Brigid Grabert; Steve L Morin; Zachary P Hallinan; Amy Corneli
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials Commun       Date:  2019-06-20

Review 10.  Remote Patient Monitoring via Non-Invasive Digital Technologies: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Ashok Vegesna; Melody Tran; Michele Angelaccio; Steve Arcona
Journal:  Telemed J E Health       Date:  2016-04-26       Impact factor: 3.536

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.