文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

Assessing the Quality and Impact of eHealth Tools: Systematic Literature Review and Narrative Synthesis.

作者信息

Jacob Christine, Lindeque Johan, Klein Alexander, Ivory Chris, Heuss Sabina, Peter Marc K

机构信息

FHNW - University of Applied Sciences Northwestern Switzerland, Windisch, Switzerland.

FHNW - University of Applied Sciences Northwestern Switzerland, Olten, Switzerland.

出版信息

JMIR Hum Factors. 2023 Mar 23;10:e45143. doi: 10.2196/45143.


DOI:10.2196/45143
PMID:36843321
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10131913/
Abstract

BACKGROUND: Technological advancements have opened the path for many technology providers to easily develop and introduce eHealth tools to the public. The use of these tools is increasingly recognized as a critical quality driver in health care; however, choosing a quality tool from the myriad of tools available for a specific health need does not come without challenges. OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to systematically investigate the literature to understand the different approaches and criteria used to assess the quality and impact of eHealth tools by considering sociotechnical factors (from technical, social, and organizational perspectives). METHODS: A structured search was completed following the participants, intervention, comparators, and outcomes framework. We searched the PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, and ProQuest databases for studies published between January 2012 and January 2022 in English, which yielded 675 results, of which 40 (5.9%) studies met the inclusion criteria. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions were followed to ensure a systematic process. Extracted data were analyzed using NVivo (QSR International), with a thematic analysis and narrative synthesis of emergent themes. RESULTS: Similar measures from the different papers, frameworks, and initiatives were aggregated into 36 unique criteria grouped into 13 clusters. Using the sociotechnical approach, we classified the relevant criteria into technical, social, and organizational assessment criteria. Technical assessment criteria were grouped into 5 clusters: technical aspects, functionality, content, data management, and design. Social assessment criteria were grouped into 4 clusters: human centricity, health outcomes, visible popularity metrics, and social aspects. Organizational assessment criteria were grouped into 4 clusters: sustainability and scalability, health care organization, health care context, and developer. CONCLUSIONS: This review builds on the growing body of research that investigates the criteria used to assess the quality and impact of eHealth tools and highlights the complexity and challenges facing these initiatives. It demonstrates that there is no single framework that is used uniformly to assess the quality and impact of eHealth tools. It also highlights the need for a more comprehensive approach that balances the social, organizational, and technical assessment criteria in a way that reflects the complexity and interdependence of the health care ecosystem and is aligned with the factors affecting users' adoption to ensure uptake and adherence in the long term.

摘要
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/43ed/10131913/915a623bd6f5/humanfactors_v10i1e45143_fig5.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/43ed/10131913/ed532908c8ed/humanfactors_v10i1e45143_fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/43ed/10131913/bdc982e2352e/humanfactors_v10i1e45143_fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/43ed/10131913/2edc2a05ad87/humanfactors_v10i1e45143_fig3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/43ed/10131913/1ce7264dbfd4/humanfactors_v10i1e45143_fig4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/43ed/10131913/915a623bd6f5/humanfactors_v10i1e45143_fig5.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/43ed/10131913/ed532908c8ed/humanfactors_v10i1e45143_fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/43ed/10131913/bdc982e2352e/humanfactors_v10i1e45143_fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/43ed/10131913/2edc2a05ad87/humanfactors_v10i1e45143_fig3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/43ed/10131913/1ce7264dbfd4/humanfactors_v10i1e45143_fig4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/43ed/10131913/915a623bd6f5/humanfactors_v10i1e45143_fig5.jpg

相似文献

[1]
Assessing the Quality and Impact of eHealth Tools: Systematic Literature Review and Narrative Synthesis.

JMIR Hum Factors. 2023-3-23

[2]
Sociotechnical Factors Affecting Patients' Adoption of Mobile Health Tools: Systematic Literature Review and Narrative Synthesis.

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2022-5-5

[3]
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-2-1

[4]
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.

Med J Aust. 2020-12

[5]
eHealth Tools Supporting Early Childhood Education and Care Centers to Assess and Enhance Nutrition and Physical Activity Environments: Protocol for a Scoping Review.

JMIR Res Protoc. 2023-10-24

[6]
Social, Organizational, and Technological Factors Impacting Clinicians' Adoption of Mobile Health Tools: Systematic Literature Review.

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020-2-20

[7]
Weight Management in Young Adults: Systematic Review of Electronic Health Intervention Components and Outcomes.

J Med Internet Res. 2019-2-6

[8]
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.

Early Hum Dev. 2020-11

[9]
Understanding Clinicians' Adoption of Mobile Health Tools: A Qualitative Review of the Most Used Frameworks.

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020-7-6

[10]
Barriers to and Facilitators of Using eHealth to Support Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Self-management: Systematic Literature Review of Perceptions of Health Care Professionals and Women With Gestational Diabetes Mellitus.

J Med Internet Res. 2022-10-27

引用本文的文献

[1]
Perceptions and Needs of Stakeholders Regarding MyPal Project's Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome App: Cross-Sectional Qualitative Focus Group Study.

JMIR Cancer. 2025-8-13

[2]
IRT analysis of the BDI-II for early online depression detection: validation in a Mexican population.

Front Psychol. 2025-4-15

[3]
Mobile Apps and Wearable Devices for Cardiovascular Health: Narrative Review.

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2025-4-4

[4]
From diabetes care to prevention: review of prediabetes apps in the DACH region.

Mhealth. 2025-1-17

[5]
Think-Aloud Testing of a Companion App for Colonoscopy Examinations: Usability Study.

JMIR Hum Factors. 2025-2-12

[6]
AI for IMPACTS Framework for Evaluating the Long-Term Real-World Impacts of AI-Powered Clinician Tools: Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis.

J Med Internet Res. 2025-2-5

[7]
Swedish Version of the System Usability Scale: Translation, Adaption, and Psychometric Evaluation.

JMIR Hum Factors. 2025-1-16

[8]
Telehealth development in the WHO European region: Results from a quantitative survey and insights from Norway.

Int J Med Inform. 2024-11

[9]
Clinical Validation of Digital Healthcare Solutions: State of the Art, Challenges and Opportunities.

Healthcare (Basel). 2024-5-22

[10]
Exploring the Role of Complexity in Health Care Technology Bottom-Up Innovations: Multiple-Case Study Using the Nonadoption, Abandonment, Scale-Up, Spread, and Sustainability Complexity Assessment Tool.

JMIR Hum Factors. 2024-4-26

本文引用的文献

[1]
From Testers to Cocreators-the Value of and Approaches to Successful Patient Engagement in the Development of eHealth Solutions: Qualitative Expert Interview Study.

JMIR Hum Factors. 2022-10-6

[2]
A systematic review of providers' attitudes toward telemental health via videoconferencing.

Clin Psychol (New York). 2020-1-6

[3]
Assessing the Clinical Robustness of Digital Health Startups: Cross-sectional Observational Analysis.

J Med Internet Res. 2022-6-20

[4]
Sociotechnical Factors Affecting Patients' Adoption of Mobile Health Tools: Systematic Literature Review and Narrative Synthesis.

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2022-5-5

[5]
Patients' Experiences of Using an eHealth Pain Management Intervention Combined With Psychomotor Physiotherapy: Qualitative Study.

JMIR Form Res. 2022-3-16

[6]
Systematic review of cost-effectiveness analysis of behavior change communication apps: Assessment of key methods.

Digit Health. 2021-3-26

[7]
Digital Behavior Change Interventions for the Prevention and Management of Type 2 Diabetes: Systematic Market Analysis.

J Med Internet Res. 2022-1-7

[8]
Review, Assess, Classify, and Evaluate (RACE): a framework for studying m-health apps and its application for opioid apps.

J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2022-1-29

[9]
Application of a health technology assessment framework to digital health technologies that manage chronic disease: a systematic review.

Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2021-12-20

[10]
Tools for Evaluating the Content, Efficacy, and Usability of Mobile Health Apps According to the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments: Systematic Review.

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2021-12-1

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

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索