Suppr超能文献

澳大利亚智能设备视力评估的使用情况和认知:混合方法研究。

Utilisation and perceptions towards smart device visual acuity assessment in Australia: a mixed methods approach.

机构信息

Centre for Eye Research Australia, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.

State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2019 Mar 23;9(3):e024266. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024266.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To investigate mobile health product use in Australia and societal and clinician perceptions towards smartphone based visual acuity (VA) assessment tools.

DESIGN

Quantitative analysis of a cross-sectional survey delivered to the general public and thematic analysis of in-depth interviews of eye health clinicians.

SETTING

Online survey within Australia and face-to-face in-depth interviews of clinicians.

PARTICIPANTS

1016 adults were recruited via Survey Monkey Audience, social media (Facebook and Twitter), Rotary Australia and Lions Clubs Australia. Six clinicians were recruited from private and public settings in Melbourne, Australia.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The study assessed socio-demographic characteristics, history of mobile health product use and perceived advantages and potential drawbacks of smartphone based VA assessment tools.

RESULTS

A total of 14.4% of the study population had previously used a mobile-based health product. After adjusting for covariates, younger age (p=0.001), male gender (p=0.01) and higher income (>$45 000) were associated with increased likelihood of having used a mobile health product (p=0.005). Seventy-two per cent of participants would use an automated smartphone based VA assessment tool, provided that the accuracy was on par to that of human assessors. Convenience (37.3%) and cost-savings (15.5%) were ranked as the greatest perceived advantages. While test accuracy (50.6%), a lack of personal contact with healthcare providers (18.3%) and data security (11.9%) were the greatest concerns. Themes to emerge from clinician qualitative data included the potential benefits for identifying refractive error in patients, as well as the ability to self-monitor vision. Concerns were raised over the potential misuse of self-testing vision apps and the inability to detect pathology.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that a substantial proportion of the Australian population do not use mobile health products. Furthermore, there remains notable concerns, including test accuracy and data privacy, with smartphone-based VA assessment tools by both clinicians and the public.

摘要

目的

调查澳大利亚移动医疗产品的使用情况以及社会大众和临床医生对基于智能手机的视力(VA)评估工具的看法。

设计

对向公众提供的横断面调查进行定量分析,并对澳大利亚墨尔本的眼科临床医生进行深入访谈的主题分析。

设置

在澳大利亚进行在线调查,并对临床医生进行面对面的深入访谈。

参与者

通过 Survey Monkey 受众、社交媒体(脸书和推特)、 Rotary澳大利亚和狮子俱乐部澳大利亚招募了 1016 名成年人。从澳大利亚私人和公共环境中招募了 6 名临床医生。

主要和次要结果

该研究评估了社会人口统计学特征、移动医疗产品使用史以及对基于智能手机的 VA 评估工具的优势和潜在缺点的看法。

结果

研究人群中,有 14.4%的人之前使用过移动医疗产品。调整协变量后,年龄较小(p=0.001)、男性(p=0.01)和收入较高(>$45000)与使用移动医疗产品的可能性增加相关(p=0.005)。72%的参与者愿意使用自动基于智能手机的 VA 评估工具,前提是准确性与人类评估者相当。便利性(37.3%)和节省成本(15.5%)被认为是最大的优势。而测试准确性(50.6%)、缺乏与医疗保健提供者的个人联系(18.3%)和数据安全(11.9%)则是最大的顾虑。从临床医生定性数据中出现的主题包括在患者中识别屈光不正的潜在好处,以及自我监测视力的能力。人们对自我测试视力应用程序的潜在滥用以及无法检测病理的问题表示担忧。

结论

我们的研究结果表明,澳大利亚有相当一部分人口不使用移动医疗产品。此外,临床医生和公众对基于智能手机的 VA 评估工具仍存在显著的担忧,包括测试准确性和数据隐私。

相似文献

2
Validation of visual acuity applications for teleophthalmology during COVID-19.
Indian J Ophthalmol. 2021 Feb;69(2):385-390. doi: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_2333_20.
3
Use of Mobile Apps for Visual Acuity Assessment: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2022 Feb 14;10(2):e26275. doi: 10.2196/26275.
4
Mobile Apps for Bipolar Disorder: A Systematic Review of Features and Content Quality.
J Med Internet Res. 2015 Aug 17;17(8):e198. doi: 10.2196/jmir.4581.
6
Visual Acuity Testing for Telehealth Using Mobile Applications.
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2021 Mar 1;139(3):344-347. doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2020.6177.
9
Accuracy of a Smartphone-based Autorefractor Compared with Criterion-standard Refraction.
Optom Vis Sci. 2018 Dec;95(12):1135-1141. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001308.
10
Comparing the Netra smartphone refractor to subjective refraction.
Clin Exp Optom. 2020 Jul;103(4):501-506. doi: 10.1111/cxo.13003. Epub 2019 Nov 26.

引用本文的文献

1
A Systematic Review of Digital Ophthalmoscopes in Medicine.
Clin Ophthalmol. 2023 Oct 6;17:2957-2965. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S423845. eCollection 2023.
2
Smart phone apps every ophthalmologist should know about.
Int J Ophthalmol. 2020 Aug 18;13(8):1329-1333. doi: 10.18240/ijo.2020.08.21. eCollection 2020.

本文引用的文献

1
Harnessing Smartphone-Based Digital Phenotyping to Enhance Behavioral and Mental Health.
Neuropsychopharmacology. 2016 Jun;41(7):1691-6. doi: 10.1038/npp.2016.7. Epub 2016 Jan 28.
2
Smartphone-Based Visual Acuity Measurement for Screening and Clinical Assessment.
JAMA. 2015;314(24):2682-3. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.15855.
3
Health App Use Among US Mobile Phone Owners: A National Survey.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2015 Nov 4;3(4):e101. doi: 10.2196/mhealth.4924.
5
The Relationship Between Visual Acuity and the Reproducibility of Visual Field Measurements in Glaucoma Patients.
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2015 Aug;56(9):5630-5. doi: 10.1167/iovs.15-17576.
6
Effectiveness of a smartphone application for testing near visual acuity.
Eye (Lond). 2015 Nov;29(11):1464-8. doi: 10.1038/eye.2015.138. Epub 2015 Jul 24.
8
The Eye Phone Study: reliability and accuracy of assessing Snellen visual acuity using smartphone technology.
Eye (Lond). 2015 Jul;29(7):888-94. doi: 10.1038/eye.2015.60. Epub 2015 May 1.
9
10
Regulating medical apps: which ones and how much?
BMJ. 2013 Oct 8;347:f6009. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f6009.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验