Suppr超能文献

移动健康干预随机对照试验中的方法学挑战:横断面调查研究与基于共识的建议

Methodological Challenges in Randomized Controlled Trials of mHealth Interventions: Cross-Sectional Survey Study and Consensus-Based Recommendations.

作者信息

Lopez-Alcalde Jesus, Wieland L Susan, Yan Yuqian, Barth Jürgen, Khami Mohammad Reza, Shivalli Siddharudha, Lokker Cynthia, Rai Harleen Kaur, Macharia Paul, Yun Sergi, Lang Elvira, Bwanika Naggirinya Agnes, Campos-Asensio Concepción, Ahmadian Leila, Witt Claudia M

机构信息

Institute for Complementary and Integrative Medicine, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Francisco de Vitoria, Madrid, Spain.

出版信息

J Med Internet Res. 2024 Dec 19;26:e53187. doi: 10.2196/53187.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Mobile health (mHealth) refers to using mobile communication devices such as smartphones to support health, health care, and public health. mHealth interventions have their own nature and characteristics that distinguish them from traditional health care interventions, including drug interventions. Thus, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of mHealth interventions present specific methodological challenges. Identifying and overcoming those challenges is essential to determine whether mHealth interventions improve health outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify specific methodological challenges in RCTs testing mHealth interventions' effects and develop consensus-based recommendations to address selected challenges.

METHODS

A 2-phase participatory research project was conducted. First, we sent a web-based survey to authors of mHealth RCTs. Survey respondents rated on a 5-point scale how challenging they found 21 methodological aspects in mHealth RCTs compared to non-mHealth RCTs. Nonsystematic searches until June 2022 informed the selection of the methodological challenges listed in the survey. Second, a subset of survey respondents participated in an online workshop to discuss recommendations to address selected methodological aspects identified in the survey. Finally, consensus-based recommendations were developed based on the workshop discussion and email interaction.

RESULTS

We contacted 1535 authors of mHealth intervention RCTs, of whom 80 (5.21%) completed the survey. Most respondents (74/80, 92%) identified at least one methodological aspect as more or much more challenging in mHealth RCTs. The aspects most frequently reported as more or much more challenging were those related to mHealth intervention integrity, that is, the degree to which the study intervention was implemented as intended, in particular managing low adherence to the mHealth intervention (43/77, 56%), defining adherence (39/79, 49%), measuring adherence (33/78, 42%), and determining which mHealth intervention components are used or received by the participant (31/75, 41%). Other challenges were also frequent, such as analyzing passive data (eg, data collected from smartphone sensors; 24/58, 41%) and verifying the participants' identity during recruitment (28/68, 41%). In total, 11 survey respondents participated in the subsequent workshop (n=8, 73% had been involved in at least 2 mHealth RCTs). We developed 17 consensus-based recommendations related to the following four categories: (1) how to measure adherence to the mHealth intervention (7 recommendations), (2) defining adequate adherence (2 recommendations), (3) dealing with low adherence rates (3 recommendations), and (4) addressing mHealth intervention components (5 recommendations).

CONCLUSIONS

RCTs of mHealth interventions have specific methodological challenges compared to those of non-mHealth interventions, particularly those related to intervention integrity. Following our recommendations for addressing these challenges can lead to more reliable assessments of the effects of mHealth interventions on health outcomes.

摘要

背景

移动健康(mHealth)是指利用智能手机等移动通信设备来支持健康、医疗保健和公共卫生。移动健康干预措施具有其自身的性质和特点,使其有别于传统医疗保健干预措施,包括药物干预。因此,移动健康干预措施的随机对照试验(RCT)面临特定的方法学挑战。识别并克服这些挑战对于确定移动健康干预措施是否能改善健康结果至关重要。

目的

我们旨在识别测试移动健康干预措施效果的随机对照试验中的特定方法学挑战,并制定基于共识的建议来应对选定的挑战。

方法

开展了一个分两阶段的参与式研究项目。首先,我们向移动健康随机对照试验的作者发送了一项基于网络的调查。调查对象采用5分制对他们认为移动健康随机对照试验中的21个方法学方面相较于非移动健康随机对照试验有多大挑战性进行评分。截至2022年6月的非系统性检索为调查中列出的方法学挑战的选择提供了依据。其次,一部分调查对象参加了一个在线研讨会,讨论应对调查中确定的选定方法学方面的建议。最后,基于研讨会讨论和电子邮件互动制定了基于共识的建议。

结果

我们联系了1535名移动健康干预随机对照试验的作者,其中80人(5.21%)完成了调查。大多数受访者(74/80,92%)认为至少有一个方法学方面在移动健康随机对照试验中更具挑战性或极具挑战性。最常被报告为更具挑战性或极具挑战性的方面是与移动健康干预完整性相关的方面,即研究干预按预期实施的程度,特别是处理对移动健康干预的低依从性(43/77,56%)、定义依从性(39/79,49%)、测量依从性(33/78,42%)以及确定参与者使用或接受了哪些移动健康干预组件(31/75,41%)。其他挑战也很常见,例如分析被动数据(如从智能手机传感器收集的数据;24/58,41%)以及在招募过程中核实参与者身份(28/68,41%)。共有11名调查对象参加了随后的研讨会(n = 8,73%参与过至少2项移动健康随机对照试验)。我们制定了17条基于共识的建议,涉及以下四类:(1)如何测量对移动健康干预的依从性(7条建议),(2)定义足够的依从性(2条建议),(3)处理低依从率(3条建议),以及(4)应对移动健康干预组件(5条建议)。

结论

与非移动健康干预的随机对照试验相比,移动健康干预的随机对照试验面临特定的方法学挑战,尤其是与干预完整性相关的挑战。遵循我们应对这些挑战的建议可使对移动健康干预对健康结果影响的评估更可靠。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/30dd/11695959/c88ba25b1538/jmir_v26i1e53187_fig1.jpg

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

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验