Klooster Iris Ten, Kip Hanneke, van Gemert-Pijnen Lisette, Crutzen Rik, Kelders Saskia
Centre for eHealth and Wellbeing Research, Department of Psychology, Health, and Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Department of Research, Stichting Transfore, Deventer, the Netherlands.
iScience. 2024 Aug 19;27(9):110771. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.110771. eCollection 2024 Sep 20.
Despite the widespread use of personalization of eHealth technologies, there is a lack of comprehensive understanding regarding its application. This systematic review aims to bridge this gap by identifying and clustering different personalization approaches based on the type of variables used for user segmentation and the adaptations to the eHealth technology and examining the role of computational methods in the literature. From the 412 included reports, we identified 13 clusters of personalization approaches, such as behavior + channeling and environment + recommendations. Within these clusters, 10 computational methods were utilized to match segments with technology adaptations, such as classification-based methods and reinforcement learning. Several gaps were identified in the literature, such as the limited exploration of technology-related variables, the limited focus on user interaction reminders, and a frequent reliance on a single type of variable for personalization. Future research should explore leveraging technology-specific features to attain individualistic segmentation approaches.
尽管电子健康技术的个性化应用广泛,但对其应用缺乏全面的理解。本系统综述旨在通过根据用于用户细分的变量类型和对电子健康技术的适应性来识别和聚类不同的个性化方法,并考察文献中计算方法的作用,以弥补这一差距。从纳入的412份报告中,我们确定了13种个性化方法类别,如行为+引导和环境+推荐。在这些类别中,使用了10种计算方法来将细分群体与技术适应性相匹配,如基于分类的方法和强化学习。文献中发现了几个差距,如对技术相关变量的探索有限、对用户交互提醒的关注有限,以及个性化常常依赖单一类型的变量。未来的研究应探索利用技术特定特征来实现个性化细分方法。