Explore the vast range of titles available.

Mobile health (mHealth) apps have the potential to be effective tools for encouraging patients with chronic diseases to self-manage their health. The success of mHealth apps is related to technology acceptance and its subsequent use by intended consumers. Therefore, it is essential to gain insights from consumers' perspectives about their use of mHealth apps in daily life. The purpose of this work was to understand consumers' perspectives on use of a self-management app following completion of a clinical trial that tested the efficacy of the app for improving health outcomes. We conducted five focus groups with paricipants of a clinical trial (NCT03182738) who were randomized to use the video information provider (VIP) for HIV-associated nonAIDS (HANA) conditions app (VIP-HANA) or an attention control app. Thematic analysis was conducted, and the themes were organized according to the two key constructs of the technology acceptance model framework: perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. Thirty-nine people living with HIV (20 from the intervention group and 19 from the control group) participated in the focus group sessions. Of the eight themes identified from focus group data, the five themes related to perceived usefulness were: (1) self-monitoring HIV-related symptoms of HANA conditions, (2) enhanced relationship with clinical providers, (3) improvement in physical and emotional health, (4) long-term impact of self-care strategies on improvement in symptoms of HANA conditions, and (5) inspired lifestyle changes to manage symptoms. The three themes related to perceived ease of use were: (1) easy to navigate, (2) avatar personalization, and (3) privacy/confidentiality maintained even when changing the location of app use. Perceived ease of use was similar in both study groups but perceived usefulness differed between study groups. Participants in both study groups found the VIP-HANA app to be useful in monitoring their symptoms and enhancing communication with their clinical care providers. However, only intervention group participants perceived the app to be useful in improving overall health and long-term symptom management. Findings from this study highlight factors that are essential to ensure the usefulness of self-management apps and facilitate sustained use of mHealth apps for people living with chronic illnesses.

Although a number of studies have investigated how consumers use social media for health-related purposes, there is a paucity of studies in the Australian context. This study aimed to explore how Australian consumers used social media for health-related purposes, specifically how they identified social media platforms, which were used, and which health-related activities commonly took place. A total of 5 focus groups (n=36 participants), each lasting 60 to 90 minutes, were conducted in the Sydney metropolitan area. The group discussions were audiorecorded and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were coded line-by-line and thematically analyzed. Participants used general search engines to locate health-related social media platforms. They accessed a wide range of social media on a daily basis, using several electronic devices (in particular, mobile phones). Although privacy was a concern, it did not prevent consumers from fully engaging in social media for health-related purposes. Blogs were used to learn from other people's experiences with the same condition. Facebook allowed consumers to follow health-related pages and to participate in disease-specific group discussions. Wikipedia was used for factual information about diseases and treatments. YouTube was accessed to learn about medical procedures such as surgery. No participant reported editing or contributing to Wikipedia or posting YouTube videos related to health topics. Twitter was rarely used for health-related purposes. Social media allowed consumers to obtain and provide disease and treatment-related information and social and emotional support for those living with the same condition. Most considered their participation as observational, but some also contributed (eg, responded to people's questions). Participants used a wide range of social media for health-related purposes. Medical information exchange (eg, disease and treatment) and social and emotional support were the cornerstones of their online activities. Social media appears to be used as a key tool to support disease self-management.

Recent advances in natural language processing and artificial intelligence have led to widespread adoption of speech recognition technologies. In consumer health applications, speech recognition is usually applied to support interactions with conversational agents for data collection, decision support, and patient monitoring. However, little is known about the use of speech recognition in consumer health applications and few studies have evaluated the efficacy of conversational agents in the hands of consumers. In other consumer-facing tools, cognitive load has been observed to be an important factor affecting the use of speech recognition technologies in tasks involving problem solving and recall. Users find it more difficult to think and speak at the same time when compared to typing, pointing, and clicking. However, the effects of speech recognition on cognitive load when performing health tasks has not yet been explored. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of speech recognition for documentation in consumer digital health tasks involving problem solving and recall. Fifty university staff and students were recruited to undertake four documentation tasks with a simulated conversational agent in a computer laboratory. The tasks varied in complexity determined by the amount of problem solving and recall required (simple and complex) and the input modality (speech recognition vs keyboard and mouse). Cognitive load, task completion time, error rate, and usability were measured. Compared to using a keyboard and mouse, speech recognition significantly increased the cognitive load for complex tasks (Z=-4.08, P<.001) and simple tasks (Z=-2.24, P=.03). Complex tasks took significantly longer to complete (Z=-2.52, P=.01) and speech recognition was found to be overall less usable than a keyboard and mouse (Z=-3.30, P=.001). However, there was no effect on errors. Use of a keyboard and mouse was preferable to speech recognition for complex tasks involving problem solving and recall. Further studies using a broader variety of consumer digital health tasks of varying complexity are needed to investigate the contexts in which use of speech recognition is most appropriate. The effects of cognitive load on task performance and its significance also need to be investigated.

No methodologically robust system exists for capturing consumer-generated patient safety reports. To address this challenge, we developed and pilot-tested a prototype consumer reporting system for patient safety, the Health Care Safety Hotline. Mixed methods evaluation. The Hotline was implemented in two US healthcare systems from 1 February 2014 through 30 June 2015. Patients, family members and caregivers associated with two US healthcare systems. A consumer-oriented incident reporting system for telephone or web-based administration was developed to elicit medical mistakes and care-related injuries. Key informant interviews, measurement of website traffic and analysis of completed reports. Key informants indicated that Hotline participation was motivated by senior leaders' support and alignment with existing quality and safety initiatives. During the measurement period from 1 October 2014 through 30 June 2015, the home page had 1530 visitors with a unique IP address. During its 17 months of operation, the Hotline received 37 completed reports including 20 mistakes without harm and 15 mistakes with injury. The largest category of mistake concerned problems with diagnosis or advice from a health practitioner. Hotline reports prompted quality reviews, an education intervention, and patient follow-ups. While generating fewer reports than its capacity to manage, the Health Care Safety Hotline demonstrated the feasibility of consumer-oriented patient safety reporting. Further research is needed to understand how to increase consumers' use of these systems.

US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations state that any prescription drug promotion that presents drug benefits to consumers must also disclose certain information about the drug's risks in a similar manner. Nearly three-quarters of all US mobile phone subscribers use a smartphone, and over half report receiving mobile advertisements on their device. The objective of this project was to investigate how prescription drugs are being promoted to consumers using mobile technologies. We were particularly interested in the presentation of drug benefits and risks, with regard to presence, placement, and prominence. We analyzed a sample of 51 mobile promotional communications and their associated linked landing pages. We assessed the content and format of the mobile communications and landing pages with regard to presentation of drug benefits and risks. Of the 51 mobile communications we coded, 41% (21/51) were product claim communications (includes the drug name, benefits, and risks), 22% (11/51) were reminder communications (includes drug name only), and 37% (19/51) were help-seeking communications (includes information about the medical condition but not the drug name). Some of the product claim communications (5/21, 24%) required scrolling to see all the benefit information; in contrast, 95% (20/21) required scrolling to see all the risk information. Of the 19 product claim communications that presented both benefits and risks, 95% (18/19) presented benefits before risks and 47% (9/19) used a bigger font for benefits than for risks. Most mobile communications (35/51, 69%) linked to branded drug websites with both benefits and risks, 25% (13/51) linked to a landing page with benefits but no visible risks, and 6% (3/51) linked to a landing page with risks but no visible benefits. Few landing pages (4/51, 8%) required scrolling to see all the benefit information; in contrast, 51% (26/51) required scrolling to see all the risk information. Of the 35 landing pages with both benefit and risk information, 71% (25/35) presented benefits before risks and 51% (18/35) used a bigger font for benefits than for risks. These results indicate that, while risks and benefits are both represented in mobile communications and their associated landing pages, they are not equally prominent and accessible. This has implications for compliance with FDA fair balance regulations.

The purpose of this study was to identify effective channels, sources, and content approaches for communicating prostate cancer prevention information to Black men. The Web of Science, PubMed and GoogleScholar databases, as well as reviews of reference lists for selected publications, were searched to select articles relevant to cancer communication channels, sources or content for Black men, focused on male-prevalent cancers and published in English. Articles were excluded if they examined only patient–provider communication, dealt exclusively with prostate cancer patients or did not separate findings by race. The selection procedures identified 41 relevant articles, which were systematically and independently reviewed by two team members to extract data on preferred channels, sources, and content for prostate cancer information. This review revealed that Black men prefer interpersonal communication for prostate cancer information; however, video can be effective. Trusted sources included personal physicians, clergy, and other community leaders, family (especially spouses) and prostate cancer survivors. Men want comprehensive information about screening, symptoms, treatment, and outcomes. Messages should be culturally tailored, encouraging empowerment and “ownership” of disease. Black men are open to prostate cancer prevention information through mediated channels when contextualized within spiritual/cultural beliefs and delivered by trusted sources.

Our objective was to determine whether and how quantitative information about drug benefits and risks is presented to consumers and healthcare professionals on cancer-related prescription drug websites. We analyzed the content of 65 active cancer-related prescription drug websites. We assessed the inclusion and presentation of quantitative information for two audiences (consumers and healthcare professionals) and two types of information (drug benefits and risks). Websites were equally likely to present quantitative information for benefits (96.9 %) and risks (95.4 %). However, the amount of the information differed significantly: Both consumer-directed and healthcare-professional-directed webpages were more likely to have quantitative information for every benefit (consumer 38.5 %; healthcare professional 86.1 %) compared with every risk (consumer 3.1 %; healthcare professional 6.2 %). The numeric and graphic presentations also differed by audience and information type. Consumers have access to quantitative information about oncology drugs and, in particular, about the benefits of these drugs. Research has shown that using quantitative information to communicate treatment benefits and risks can increase patients’ and physicians’ understanding and can aid in treatment decision-making, although some numeric and graphic formats are more useful than others.

In this piece, we use the example of cystic fibrosis (CF) to examine how video blogs (vlog, pronounced as one syllable) may be uniquely suited to overcome barriers to patient engagement for patients with chronic illnesses, describe concerns related to such use, and offer recommendations for providers about incorporating vlogs in their clinical practice. 1 Patient Engagement in Cystic Fibrosis CF is an inherited, chronic disease that predominantly affects the lungs and digestive system. [...]it requires complex daily care and the treatment burden may leave patients with little time or energy for additional interactions with the healthcare system or the CF advocacy community [4, 5]. An additional barrier is that because CF patients may be susceptible to acquiring infections from one another, treatment guidelines recommend that they keep at least six feet away from one another [6], making it difficult to foster in-person patient communities. 2 Vlogs as a Resource As the name suggests, vlogs are the video analogs to online journals, or blogs. 4 Overcoming Engagement Barriers The Frey Life exemplifies the ways vlogs exemplify one form of peer-to-peer patient support [7-9] and may help patients with CF and other chronic illnesses engage with the health system and with one another. Vlogs can provide three key functions: (i)Model engagement: \"I'm all about do-your-treatment\", Mary says, and through the vlog she models her engagement with the healthcare system and her own treatment regimen, such as documenting her hospital stays or how she accesses and cares for her chest port to...

Dr. Conor Lavelle, Division of Emergency Medicine, University of Toronto, 190 Elizabeth Street, R. Fraser Elliott Bldg., Rm. 3-805, Toronto, ON, M5G 2C4, Canada; Email: lavelle.conor@gmail.com Working in the emergency department (ED) recently, I was approached by a frustrated patient.In the age of Google, our role as doctors has changed in a profound way: we’re no longer in the business of simply meting out bits of information; we now have a responsibility to engage in a dialogue with our patients and to interpret their latest Internet findings as responsibly as we can.Keywords: cognitive bias, humanities, patient safety Competing interests:

As the quality of online health information remains questionable, there is a pressing need to understand how consumers evaluate this information. Past reviews identified content-, source-, and individual-related factors that influence consumer judgment in this area. However, systematic knowledge concerning the evaluation process, that is, why and how these factors influence the evaluation behavior, is lacking. This review aims (1) to identify criteria (rules that reflect notions of value and worth) that consumers use to evaluate the quality of online health information and the indicators (properties of information objects to which criteria are applied to form judgments) they use to support the evaluation in order to achieve a better understanding of the process of information quality evaluation and (2) to explicate the relationship between indicators and criteria to provide clear guidelines for designers of consumer health information systems. A systematic literature search was performed in seven digital reference databases including Medicine, Psychology, Communication, and Library and Information Science to identify empirical studies that report how consumers directly and explicitly describe their evaluation of online health information quality. Thirty-seven articles met the inclusion criteria. A qualitative content analysis was performed to identify quality evaluation criteria, indicators, and their relationships. We identified 25 criteria and 165 indicators. The most widely reported criteria used by consumers were trustworthiness, expertise, and objectivity. The indicators were related to source, content, and design. Among them, 114 were positive indicators (entailing positive quality judgments), 35 were negative indicators (entailing negative judgments), and 16 indicators had both positive and negative quality influence, depending on contextual factors (eg, source and individual differences) and criteria applied. The most widely reported indicators were site owners/sponsors; consensus among multiple sources; characteristics of writing and language; advertisements; content authorship; and interface design. Consumer evaluation of online health information is a complex cost-benefit analysis process that involves the use of a wide range of criteria and a much wider range of quality indicators. There are commonalities in the use of criteria across user groups and source types, but the differences are hard to ignore. Evidently, consumers' health information evaluation can be characterized as highly subjective and contextualized, and sometimes, misinformed. These findings invite more research into how different user groups evaluate different types of online sources and a personalized approach to educate users about evaluating online health information quality.