Barbaric Antonia, Christofferson Kenneth, Benseler Susanne M, Lalloo Chitra, Mariakakis Alex, Pham Quynh, Swart Joost F, Yeung Rae S M, Cafazzo Joseph A
Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Centre for Digital Therapeutics, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Digit Health. 2025 Jan 6;11:20552076241309386. doi: 10.1177/20552076241309386. eCollection 2025 Jan-Dec.
Health recommender systems (HRSs) are increasingly used to complement existing clinical decision-making processes, but their use for chronic diseases remains underexplored. Recognizing the importance of collaborative decision making (CDM) and patient engagement in chronic disease treatment, this review explored how HRSs support patients in managing their illness.
A scoping review was conducted using the framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley, advanced by Levac et al., in line with the PRISMA-ScR checklist. Quantitative (descriptive numerical summary) and qualitative (inductive content analysis) methods wered used to synthesize the data.
Forty-five articles were included in the final review, most commonly covering diabetes (9/45, 20%), mental health (9/45, 20.0%), and tobacco dependence (7/45, 15.6%). Behavior change theories (10/45, 22.2%) and authoritative sources (10/45, 22.2%) were the most commonly referenced sources for design and development work. From the thematic analysis, we conclude: (a) the main goal of HRSs is to induce behavior change, but limited research investigates their effectiveness in achieving this aim; (b) studies acknowledge that theories, models, frameworks, and/or guidelines help design HRSs to elicit specific behavior change, but they do not implement them; (c) connections between CDM and HRS purpose should be more explicit; and (d) HRSs can often offer other self-management services, such as progress tracking and chatbots.
We recommend a greater emphasis on evaluation outcomes beyond algorithmic performance to determine HRS effectiveness and the creation of an evidence-driven, methodological approach to creating HRSs to optimize their use in enhancing patient care.
Our work aims to provide a summary of the current landscape of health recommender system (HRS) use for chronic disease management. HRSs are digital tools designed to help people manage their health by providing personalized recommendations based on their health history, behaviors, and preferences, enabling them to make more informed health decisions. Given the increased use of these tools for personalized care, and especially with advancements in generative artificial intelligence, understanding the current methods and evaluation processes used is integral to optimizing their effectiveness. Our findings show that HRSs are most used for diabetes, mental health, and tobacco dependence, but only a small percentage of publications directly reference and/or use relevant frameworks to help guide their design and evaluation processes. Furthermore, the goal for most of these HRSs is to induce behavior change, but there is limited research investigating how effective they are in accomplishing this. Given these findings, we recommend that evaluations shift their focus from algorithms to more holistic approaches and to be more intentional about the processes used when designing the tool to support an evidence-driven approach and ultimately create more effective and useful HRSs for chronic disease management.
健康推荐系统(HRS)越来越多地被用于补充现有的临床决策过程,但其在慢性病管理中的应用仍未得到充分探索。认识到共同决策(CDM)和患者参与慢性病治疗的重要性,本综述探讨了HRS如何支持患者管理疾病。
使用Arksey和O'Malley提出、Levac等人改进的框架,并符合PRISMA-ScR清单进行了一项范围综述。采用定量(描述性数值总结)和定性(归纳内容分析)方法对数据进行综合分析。
最终综述纳入了45篇文章,最常涉及的疾病是糖尿病(9/45,20%)、心理健康(9/45,20.0%)和烟草依赖(7/45,15.6%)。行为改变理论(10/45,22.2%)和权威来源(10/45,22.2%)是设计和开发工作中最常引用的来源。通过主题分析,我们得出以下结论:(a)HRS的主要目标是促使行为改变,但仅有有限的研究调查其在实现这一目标方面的有效性;(b)研究承认理论、模型、框架和/或指南有助于设计HRS以引发特定的行为改变,但并未加以实施;(c)CDM与HRS目的之间的联系应更加明确;(d)HRS通常可以提供其他自我管理服务,如进度跟踪和聊天机器人。
我们建议更加强调超越算法性能的评估结果,以确定HRS的有效性,并创建一种基于证据的方法来创建HRS,以优化其在改善患者护理方面的应用。
我们的工作旨在总结健康推荐系统(HRS)用于慢性病管理的当前情况。HRS是一种数字工具,旨在通过根据个人的健康史、行为和偏好提供个性化建议,帮助人们管理健康,使他们能够做出更明智的健康决策。鉴于这些工具在个性化护理中的使用增加,特别是随着生成式人工智能的发展,了解当前使用的方法和评估过程对于优化其有效性至关重要。我们的研究结果表明,HRS最常用于糖尿病、心理健康和烟草依赖,但只有一小部分出版物直接引用和/或使用相关框架来指导其设计和评估过程。此外,大多数这些HRS的目标是促使行为改变,但关于它们在实现这一目标方面的有效性的研究有限。鉴于这些发现,我们建议评估将重点从算法转移到更全面的方法上,并在设计工具时更加注重所使用的过程,以支持基于证据的方法,并最终创建更有效和有用的用于慢性病管理的HRS。