Mobile Health Technology Evaluation (original) (raw)
Related papers
Mobile health technology evaluation: the mHealth evidence workshop
American journal of preventive medicine, 2013
Creative use of new mobile and wearable health information and sensing technologies (mHealth) has the potential to reduce the cost of health care and improve well-being in numerous ways. These applications are being developed in a variety of domains, but rigorous research is needed to examine the potential, as well as the challenges, of utilizing mobile technologies to improve health outcomes. Currently, evidence is sparse for the efficacy of mHealth. Although these technologies may be appealing and seemingly innocuous, research is needed to assess when, where, and for whom mHealth devices, apps, and systems are efficacious.
Exploring Innovative Methods to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Mobile Health
American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2013
Creative use of new mobile and wearable health information and sensing technologies (mHealth) has the potential to reduce the cost of health care and improve well-being in numerous ways. These applications are being developed in a variety of domains, but rigorous research is needed to examine the potential, as well as the challenges, of utilizing mobile technologies to improve health outcomes. Currently, evidence is sparse for the efficacy of mHealth. Although these technologies may be appealing and seemingly innocuous, research is needed to assess when, where, and for whom mHealth devices, apps, and systems are efficacious. In order to outline an approach to evidence generation in the field of mHealth that would ensure research is conducted on a rigorous empirical and theoretic foundation, on August 16, 2011, researchers gathered for the mHealth Evidence Workshop at NIH. The current paper presents the results of the workshop. Although the discussions at the meeting were cross-cutting, the areas covered can be categorized broadly into three areas: (1) evaluating assessments; (2) evaluating interventions; and (3) reshaping evidence generation using mHealth. This paper brings these concepts together to describe current evaluation standards, discuss future possibilities, and set a grand goal for the emerging field of mHealth research.
BMC Research Notes, 2010
Background: The application of mobile computing and communication technology is rapidly expanding in the fields of health care and public health. This systematic review will summarise the evidence for the effectiveness of mobile technology interventions for improving health and health service outcomes (M-health) around the world. Findings: To be included in the review interventions must aim to improve or promote health or health service use and quality, employing any mobile computing and communication technology. This includes: (1) interventions designed to improve diagnosis, investigation, treatment, monitoring and management of disease; (2) interventions to deliver treatment or disease management programmes to patients, health promotion interventions, and interventions designed to improve treatment compliance; and (3) interventions to improve health care processes e.g. appointment attendance, result notification, vaccination reminders. A comprehensive, electronic search strategy will be used to identify controlled studies, published since 1990, and indexed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Global Health, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, or the UK NHS Health Technology Assessment database. The search strategy will include terms (and synonyms) for the following mobile electronic devices (MEDs) and a range of compatible media: mobile phone; personal digital assistant (PDA); handheld computer (e.g. tablet PC); PDA phone (e.g. BlackBerry, Palm Pilot); Smartphone; enterprise digital assistant; portable media player (i.e. MP3 or MP4 player); handheld video game console. No terms for health or health service outcomes will be included, to ensure that all applications of mobile technology in public health and health services are identified. Bibliographies of primary studies and review articles meeting the inclusion criteria will be searched manually to identify further eligible studies. Data on objective and self-reported outcomes and study quality will be independently extracted by two review authors. Where there are sufficient numbers of similar interventions, we will calculate and report pooled risk ratios or standardised mean differences using meta-analysis. Discussion: This systematic review will provide recommendations on the use of mobile computing and communication technology in health care and public health and will guide future work on intervention development and primary research in this field.
Theoretical Advancements in mHealth: A Systematic Review of Mobile Apps
There are now few hundred thousand healthcare apps, yet there is a gap in our understanding of the theoretical mechanisms for which, and how, technological features translate into improved healthcare outcomes. In particular, the technological convergence, within mobile health (mHealth) apps, of the processes of mass and interpersonal communication, and human-computer interaction requires greater parsing in the literature. This paper analyzed 85 empirical studies on mHealth apps using the Input-Mechanism-Output model. We found in the literature that, firstly, there is a greater emphasis on technological inputs (87%) of accessibility, usability, usage, and data quality, than health outputs (52%) such as system process efficiencies and individual level behavioral or health outcomes. Secondly, there is little evidence of explanatory mechanisms (19%) of how the effects of mHealth apps are achieved. While we believe that successful apps would require research that incorporates technological inputs, theoretical mechanisms and health outputs, such studies are a rarity (n = 3). There is a minor increase in rigor with randomized control trials (n = 5), and a preponderance of discussion around social influence (n = 8) and gamification (n = 7), albeit in a scattered manner. We discuss the implications of the trend towards socialization and gamification findings in terms of future research, particularly in terms of study design guided by theoretical mechanisms.
Advancing the Science of mHealth
Journal of Health Communication, 2012
Mobile health (mHealth) technologies have the potential to greatly impact health research, health care, and health outcomes, but the exponential growth of the technology has outpaced the science. This article outlines two initiatives designed to enhance the science of mHealth. The mHealth Evidence Workshop used an expert
Recent rapid advances in technology have provided us with a golden opportunity to effect change in health-related outcomes for chronic disease by employing digital technologies to encourage and support behavior change to promote and maintain health. Behavior change theories are the bedrock to developing evidence-based mHealth interventions. Digital technologies enable researchers to empirically test behavioral theories in "real-world" contexts using behavior change techniques . According to the European Commission (2014) among the world's population of 7 billion, there are over 5 billion mobile devices and over 90% of the users have their mobile device near them 24 hr a day. This provides a huge opportunity for behavior change and one that health psychologists have already begun to address. However, while a novel and exciting area of research, many early studies have been criticized for lacking a strong evidence base in both design and implementation. The European Commission conducted a public consultation in 2016 on the issues surrounding the use of mHealth tools (e.g., apps) and found a lack of global standards was a significant barrier. Recently, the World Health Organization (WHO) mHealth Technical Evidence Review Group developed the mHealth evidence reporting and assessment (mERA) checklist for specifying the content of mHealth interventions. Health psychologists play a key role in developing mHealth interventions, particularly in the management of chronic disease. This article discusses current challenges facing widespread integration of mobile technology into selfmanagement of chronic disease including issues around security and regulation, as well as investigating mechanisms to overcoming these barriers.
Distinguishing features in the assessment of mHealth apps
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research
Introduction: The unparalleled surge in digital health adoption during the COVID-19 pandemic has emphasized the potential of mHealth apps. However, the quality of available evidence is generally low, and regulatory frameworks have focused on apps with medical purposes only, overlooking apps with significant interactions with patients that may require stronger oversight. Areas covered: To support this expanded evidence generation process, we identified the reasons that distinguish mHealth apps compared to medical devices at large and that should differentially feature their assessment. mHealth apps are characterized by the iterative nature of the corresponding interventions, frequent user interactions with a non-linear relationship between technology usage, engagement and outcomes, significant organizational implications, as well as challenges associated with genericization, their broad diagnostic potential, and price setting. Expert Opinion: The renewed reliance experienced during the pandemic and the unprecedented injection of resources through recovery instruments can further boost the development of apps. Only robust evidence of the benefits of mHealth apps will persuade health-care professionals and beneficiaries to systematically deploy them. Regulatory bodies will need to question their current approaches by adopting comprehensive evaluation processes that adequately consider the specific features of mHealth apps.
Evidence-Based mHealth Chronic Disease Mobile App Intervention Design: Development of a Framework
JMIR research protocols, 2016
Mobile technology offers new capabilities that can help to drive important aspects of chronic disease management at both an individual and population level, including the ability to deliver real-time interventions that can be connected to a health care team. A framework that supports both development and evaluation is needed to understand the aspects of mHealth that work for specific diseases, populations, and in the achievement of specific outcomes in real-world settings. This framework should incorporate design structure and process, which are important to translate clinical and behavioral evidence, user interface, experience design and technical capabilities into scalable, replicable, and evidence-based mobile health (mHealth) solutions to drive outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the identification and development of an app intervention design framework, and its subsequent refinement through development of various types of mHealth apps for chronic disease. The proc...
Mapping mHealth Research: A Decade of Evolution
Journal of Medical Internet Research, 2013
Background: For the last decade, mHealth has constantly expanded as a part of eHealth. Mobile applications for health have the potential to target heterogeneous audiences and address specific needs in different situations, with diverse outcomes, and to complement highly developed health care technologies. The market is rapidly evolving, making countless new mobile technologies potentially available to the health care system; however, systematic research on the impact of these technologies on health outcomes remains scarce. Objective: To provide a comprehensive view of the field of mHealth research to date and to understand whether and how the new generation of smartphones has triggered research, since their introduction 5 years ago. Specifically, we focused on studies aiming to evaluate the impact of mobile phones on health, and we sought to identify the main areas of health care delivery where mobile technologies can have an impact. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted on the impact of mobile phones and smartphones in health care. Abstracts and articles were categorized using typologies that were partly adapted from existing literature and partly created inductively from publications included in the review. Results: The final sample consisted of 117 articles published between 2002 and 2012. The majority of them were published in the second half of our observation period, with a clear upsurge between 2007 and 2008, when the number of articles almost doubled. The articles were published in 77 different journals, mostly from the field of medicine or technology and medicine. Although the range of health conditions addressed was very wide, a clear focus on chronic conditions was noted. The research methodology of these studies was mostly clinical trials and pilot studies, but new designs were introduced in the second half of our observation period. The size of the samples drawn to test mobile health applications also increased over time. The majority of the studies tested basic mobile phone features (eg, text messaging), while only a few assessed the impact of smartphone apps. Regarding the investigated outcomes, we observed a shift from assessment of the technology itself to assessment of its impact. The outcome measures used in the studies were mostly clinical, including both self-reported and objective measures. Conclusions: Research interest in mHealth is growing, together with an increasing complexity in research designs and aim specifications, as well as a diversification of the impact areas. However, new opportunities offered by new mobile technologies do not seem to have been explored thus far. Mapping the evolution of the field allows a better understanding of its strengths and weaknesses and can inform future developments.