Cited by 30Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsICT in Developing CommunitiesMobile Learning in Education

Smart phone accessibility and mHealth use in a limited resource setting

Garner, Shelby L., Sudia, Tanya, Rachaprolu, Spurgeon·2018·International Journal of Nursing Practice

Abstract

Aim: To determine smartphone access and use including future opportunities for mHealth and potential ethical implications among health care professionals practicing at a health care facility in Bengaluru, India. Background: The evolution of smart phones can provide convenient, portable, and rapid access to resources for health care professionals. While mobile phone accessibility has improved in recent years in many low and middle‐income countries, the use of smart phones to address health priorities remains limited in some limited resource settings. Design: A quantitative descriptive design was used. Methods: A survey was administered in November of 2016 to nurses and physicians at a tertiary care hospital in India. Results/Findings: All respondents had a mobile phone, and the majority owned a smart phone that was used for text messaging, email, accessing internet, and downloading apps. Participants recommended smart phone use to improve health care provider access to continuing education and to improve patient knowledge about health. Physicians had better access to mHealth resources compared with nurses. Conclusion: Credible, evidence‐based, affordable mobile applications are needed to provide a platform for continuing health education to health professionals and patients in India and limited resource settings. Nurses need equitable access to mHealth resources to build successful mHealth initiatives.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ijn.12609

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Garner, S. L., Sudia, T., & Rachaprolu, S.
Affiliations
  • Baylor University (US)
  • Bangalore Baptist Hospital (IN)
Corresponding author
Garner, Shelby L.
Venue
International Journal of Nursing Practice
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-11-20
Volume
24
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 1322-7114 (ISSN-L)
  • 1440-172X
OpenAlex
W2769618303
Cited by
30
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2
FWCI
2.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Nursing Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › ICT in Developing Communities
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Mobile Learning in Education
Keywords
smartphone accessibility, mobile health, healthcare workers, nurses, physicians, continuing education, mobile application, resource-limited settings, health care ethics, Bangalore
MeSH terms
Smartphone, Adult, Female, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, India, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, Telemedicine, Cell Phone, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review