Recruitment for the semistructured interviews was conducted using purposive and snowball sampling at a large Veterans Affairs hospital in the Southeast United States. Veterans and their care partners were identified from the following sources: (1) on-site in services conducted with primary care teams, (2) web-based in services, (3) direct staff referrals, and (4) internal tracking of the report of current registrants. Potential participants were approached via phone. A subsample of the interview participants were asked to participate in the subsequent user testing phase. A subsample of three agreed to participate in user testing. One health care staff became aware of the project and volunteered to be part of the user testing for a staff perspective. Inclusion criteria included veterans who were aged ≥18 years, who were registered My HealtheVet users, who had no cognitive impairment that prevented the use of a PC or the ability to engage in project activities, and who reported having a caregiver who assisted them with health care management. Inclusion criteria for care partners included those aged ≥18 years, who had no cognitive impairment that prevented the use of a PC or the ability to engage in project activities, and who reported providing caregiving assistance. On the basis of qualitative sampling methods, saturation was anticipated to occur between 12 and 15 interviews for each VDT user type (ie, veteran and care partner) [22 ]. An overrecruitment strategy was used to allow for attrition. Up to 25 individuals representing each user type were recruited to ensure saturation across domains.
Veteran has no cognitive impairment that prevents the use of a PC or the ability to engage in project activities
Veteran reports having a caregiver who assists them with health care management
Caregiver age >= 18 years
Caregiver has no cognitive impairment that prevents the use of a PC or the ability to engage in project activities
Caregiver reports providing caregiving assistance
positive controls
None explicitly mentioned
negative controls
None explicitly mentioned
Annotations
Based on most similar protocols
Etiam vel ipsum. Morbi facilisis vestibulum nisl. Praesent cursus laoreet felis. Integer adipiscing pretium orci. Nulla facilisi. Quisque posuere bibendum purus. Nulla quam mauris, cursus eget, convallis ac, molestie non, enim. Aliquam congue. Quisque sagittis nonummy sapien. Proin molestie sem vitae urna. Maecenas lorem.
As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to
get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required