Ananthakrishnan Ananya, Milne-Ives Madison, Cong Cen, Shankar Rohit, Lakey Ben, Alexander Jorge, Tapuria Archana, Marchal Ariane, Joy Elizabeth, Meinert Edward
Translational and Clinical Research Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, United Kingdom.
Translational and Clinical Research Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, United Kingdom; Centre for Health Technology, School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Plymouth, Plymouth PL4 6DN, United Kingdom.
Int J Med Inform. 2025 Mar;195:105697. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2024.105697. Epub 2024 Nov 14.
People often look online for information about health concerns, but the vast amount of available and unregulated content can cause misinformation and potential harm. Health recommender systems (HRSs) can address this issue by recommending personalised health information. Previous research has evaluated individual systems, but there is a lack of reviews synthesising their evaluation findings. Such a synthesis is needed to ensure that future recommender designs have a positive impact on target health or behavioural outcomes.
This review aimed to provide a summary of the evidence obtained from previous studies evaluating HRSs and highlight methodological considerations and gaps in the current research.
The review was developed using the PRISMA-ScR and PICOS frameworks. PubMed, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Scopus were searched for studies that evaluated at least one HRS and involved human participants. A descriptive analysis was conducted on included studies and key themes and gaps in the literature were assessed.
36 papers evaluating 34 HRSs were included. The systems targeted 13 different health conditions and provided different types of recommendations. Evaluation designs varied, with sample sizes ranging from 1 to 8057, and study durations from a single session to three years. A variety of outcome measures were used, including accuracy, engagement, clinical or behavioural outcomes, and participant perspectives.
The number of studies about HRSs is increasing, but there is a distinct lack of robust scientific research. The heterogeneity of outcome measures made it difficult to draw conclusions about their efficacy, but the data suggest that HRSs can help with the self-management of a wide range of conditions. There is a need to strengthen the available early-stage evidence with further research, evaluating multiple outcome measures including clinical outcomes, usability, and acceptability over a longer period to show real-world impact.
人们经常在网上查找有关健康问题的信息,但大量可得且未经监管的内容可能会导致错误信息并造成潜在危害。健康推荐系统(HRS)可以通过推荐个性化的健康信息来解决这一问题。先前的研究评估了单个系统,但缺乏综合其评估结果的综述。需要进行这样的综合以确保未来的推荐设计对目标健康或行为结果产生积极影响。
本综述旨在总结先前评估HRS的研究所得证据,并强调当前研究中的方法学考量和差距。
本综述采用PRISMA-ScR和PICOS框架进行。在PubMed、ACM数字图书馆、IEEE Xplore、科学网、ScienceDirect和Scopus中搜索评估至少一个HRS且涉及人类参与者的研究。对纳入研究进行描述性分析,并评估文献中的关键主题和差距。
纳入了36篇评估34个HRS的论文。这些系统针对13种不同健康状况,并提供了不同类型的推荐。评估设计各不相同,样本量从1到8057不等,研究持续时间从单次会话到三年。使用了多种结果指标,包括准确性、参与度、临床或行为结果以及参与者观点。
关于HRS的研究数量在增加,但明显缺乏有力的科学研究。结果指标的异质性使得难以就其疗效得出结论,但数据表明HRS可以帮助多种状况的自我管理。需要通过进一步研究加强现有的早期证据,评估包括临床结果、可用性和可接受性在内的多种结果指标,并在更长时期内展示实际影响。