Search Articles

View query in Help articles search

Search Results (1 to 10 of 2291 Results)

Download search results: CSV END BibTex RIS


eHealth Literacy and Participation in Remote Blood Pressure Monitoring Among Patients With Hypertension: Cross-Sectional Study

eHealth Literacy and Participation in Remote Blood Pressure Monitoring Among Patients With Hypertension: Cross-Sectional Study

With 47.3% adult population with hypertension in the United States in 2021 [29], using 5% type 1 error (P=.05), the minimum sample size required to estimate participation in RBPM was 383 participants [30]. A minimum of 500 sample size has been recommended for detecting differences between the sample estimates and the population in observational studies involving logistic regression [31]. We stopped recruitment as soon as possible when we reached a sample size of 500.

Chinwe E Eze, Michael P Dorsch, Antoinette B Coe, Corey A Lester, Lorraine R Buis, Karen B Farris

J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e71926

Leveraging Dual Usability Methods to Evaluate Clinical Decision Support Among Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury: Mixed Methods Study

Leveraging Dual Usability Methods to Evaluate Clinical Decision Support Among Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury: Mixed Methods Study

CT: computed tomography; D/C: discontinue anticoagulation order; ICD-10-CM: International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification; ICP: intracranial pressure; IVC: inferior vena cava; S/P: status post; TBI: traumatic brain injury. Given the logic model, patients will enter the system by admission under predetermined diagnoses, generally falling under the traumatic brain injury category.

Rubina F Rizvi, Sameen Faisal, Mark Sussman, Patricia Mendlick, Sam Brown, Elizabeth Lindemann, Sean Switzer, Genevieve B Melton, Christopher J Tignanelli

JMIR Hum Factors 2025;12:e60268

“Digital Clinicians” Performing Obesity Medication Self-Injection Education: Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial

“Digital Clinicians” Performing Obesity Medication Self-Injection Education: Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial

This difference was not statistically significant (Table 2; P=.52). Responses recording “Pain and Skin reactions” from the control group had a favorable, nonsignificantly higher mean rank. Self-Efficacy scores across control and digital clinician groups. SIAQ: Self-Injection Assessment Questionnaire. Self-injection self-efficacy assessment results at 2 weeks post intervention.

Sean Coleman, Caitríona Lynch, Hemendra Worlikar, Emily Kelly, Kate Loveys, Andrew J Simpkin, Jane C Walsh, Elizabeth Broadbent, Francis M Finucane, Derek O' Keeffe

JMIR Diabetes 2025;10:e63503

Concordance Between Survey and Electronic Health Record Data in the COVID-19 Citizen Science Study: Retrospective Cohort Analysis

Concordance Between Survey and Electronic Health Record Data in the COVID-19 Citizen Science Study: Retrospective Cohort Analysis

Chi-square statistics and P values were calculated. A Bonferroni correction was applied to account for multiple comparisons, adjusting the significance threshold to .002 (.05/23). P values less than .001 were reported as P For all domains, the following statistics were generated along with their 95% CI values: overall agreement (or overall accuracy), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and Cohen κ.

Elizabeth Crull, Emily C O'Brien, Pavel Antiperovitch, Kirubel Asfaw, Alexis L Beatty, Djeneba Audrey Djibo, Alan F Kaul, John Kornak, Gregory M Marcus, Madelaine Faulkner Modrow, Jeffrey E Olgin, Jaime Orozco, Soo Park, Noah Peyser, Mark J Pletcher, Thomas W Carton

JMIR Form Res 2025;9:e58097

Population-Based Digital Health Interventions to Deliver at-Home COVID-19 Testing: SCALE-UP II Randomized Clinical Trial

Population-Based Digital Health Interventions to Deliver at-Home COVID-19 Testing: SCALE-UP II Randomized Clinical Trial

Reach-Accept testing in the Chatbot arm was lower than in SMS text messaging (174/1051, 16.6% vs 555/1066, 52.1%; a RR 0.317, 98.33% CI 0.27‐0.38; P Reach-Accept testing was higher among participants messaged every 10 days vs every 30 days (860/15,717, 5.5% vs 752/15,722, 4.8%; a RR 1.144, 97.5% CI 1.03‐1.28; P=.01; Table 2), and lower if the participants were offered access to PN compared with those in the no PN condition (680/15,718, 4.3% vs 932/15,721, 5.9%; a RR 0.729, 97.5% CI 0.65‐0.81; P Out of 2117 participants

Guilherme Del Fiol, Tatyana V Kuzmenko, Brian Orleans, Jonathan J Chipman, Tom Greene, Ray Meads, Kimberly A Kaphingst, Bryan Gibson, Kensaku Kawamoto, Andy J King, Tracey Siaperas, Shlisa Hughes, Alan Pruhs, Courtney Pariera Dinkins, Cho Y Lam, Joni H Pierce, Ryzen Benson, Emerson P Borsato, Ryan C Cornia, Leticia Stevens, Richard L Bradshaw, Chelsey R Schlechter, David W Wetter

J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e74145