JMIR Formative Research

View query in Help articles search

Field

e.g. mhealth

Operator

Field

Criteria

e.g. John Smith or 0000-0001-6479-5330

Exact Match for Criteria

Yes No

Search Results (1 to 10 of 555 Results)

Download search results: CSV END BibTex RIS

Sort by:

Patient and Clinician Perspectives on Alert-Based Remote Monitoring–First Care for Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices: Semistructured Interview Study Within the Veterans Health Administration

While it was not apparent in the review of interview recordings or transcripts, this power dynamic may have incentivized veteran patients and clinicians to speak more favorably of the VANCDSP or caused interviewees to present their care or their patient’s existing care in a more favorable light.

Allison Kratka, Thomas L Rotering, Scott Munson, Merritt H Raitt, Mary A Whooley, Sanket S Dhruva

JMIR Cardio 2025;9:e66215

Download Citation: END BibTex RIS

Download PDF Download XML

Clinicians’ Perceptions and Potential Applications of Robotics for Task Automation in Critical Care: Qualitative Study

Jiafeng Song, Rishika Iytha Sridhar, Darlene Marie Rogers, Cheryl Hiddleson, Carolyn Davis, Tina Lynn Holden, Shanna Ramsey-Haynes, Lisa Reif, Julie Swann, Craig S Jabaley, Mary Gullatte, Rishikesan Kamaleswaran

J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e62957

Download Citation: END BibTex RIS

Download PDF Download XML

Developing and Implementing Provider-Training and Evidence-Based Tools to Support Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Decision-Making and Increase PrEP Adherence Among Young Men Who Have Sex With Men: Protocol for the PrEP Choice Longitudinal Cohort Study

With 400 participants, the minimum detectable difference in the Pr EP adherence and persistence rates was 5.6%, assuming 15% loss to follow-up and a reference rate of 20%, at 0.80 power with a 1-sided test and 0.05 type I error. For baseline to postintervention analyses, simulation-based results indicated the minimum detectable difference from a baseline rate of 20% was approximately 9% (odds ratio 1.6), assuming again 15% loss to follow-up, at 0.80 power with a 1-sided test and 0.05 type I error [39].

Crissi Rainer, Rebecca Schnall, Mary R Tanner, Carla A Galindo, Karen W Hoover, Sylvie Naar, Maeve Brin, Andres Martinez, Haomiao Jia, Maria Mendoza, Lisa Hightow-Weidman