IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0306772.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patient motivation as a predictor of digital health intervention effects: A meta-epidemiological study of cancer trials

Author

Listed:
  • Yuqian Yan
  • Jesús López-Alcalde
  • Elena Stallings
  • Elena Jimenez Tejero
  • Claudia M Witt
  • Jürgen Barth

Abstract

The objective of this meta-epidemiological study was to develop a rating that captures participants’ motivation at the study level in digital health intervention (DHI) randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The rating was used to investigate whether participants’ motivation is associated with the effect estimates in DHI RCTs for cancer patients. The development of the rating was based on a bottom-up approach involving the collection of information that captures participants’ baseline motivation in empirical studies from the Smartphone-RCCT Database. We specified three indicators for rating: indicator 1 captures whether the study team actively selects or enhances the motivation of the potential study participants; indicator 2 captures the study participants’ active engagement before the treatment allocation; and indicator 3 captures the potential bond and trust between the study participants and the person/institution referring to the study. The rating of each indicator and the overall rating varies between high motivation, moderate motivation, and low motivation. We applied the rating across 27 DHI RCTs with cancer patients. We performed meta-regression analysis to examine the effect of patient motivation on quality of life (QoL), psychological outcomes, and attrition. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) indicated moderate to poor inter-rater reliability. The meta-regression showed that cancer patients’ overall motivation before engaging in the intervention was associated with the treatment effect of QoL. Patient motivation was not found to be associated with psychological outcomes or attrition. Subgroup analyses revealed that the clinical effects of DHIs were more prevalent in the high-motivation subgroups, whereas the low-motivation subgroups were unlikely to show intervention benefits. The likelihood of dropouts from DHIs seems to be especially high among the low-bond (indicator 3) subgroup. We suggest using single indicators since they reflect specific content. Better reporting about baseline motivation is required to enable meaningful interpretations in not only primary studies but also in evidence syntheses.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuqian Yan & Jesús López-Alcalde & Elena Stallings & Elena Jimenez Tejero & Claudia M Witt & Jürgen Barth, 2024. "Patient motivation as a predictor of digital health intervention effects: A meta-epidemiological study of cancer trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(7), pages 1-14, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0306772
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0306772
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0306772
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0306772&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0306772?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0306772. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.