ReviewJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2017
Using digital interventions to improve the cardiometabolic health of populations: a meta-review of reporting quality.
Review in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05648383 (An Intersectoral Innovative Solution Involving DIGItal Tools, Empowering Families and Integrating Community CARE Services for the Prevention and Management of Type 2 Diabetes and Hypertension), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
An Intersectoral Innovative Solution Involving DIGItal Tools, Empowering Families and Integrating Community CARE Services for the Prevention and Management of Type 2 Diabetes and Hypertension
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Reporting quality of interventions using a wearable activity tracker to improve physical activity in patients with inflammatory arthritis or osteoarthritis: a systematic review.Rheumatology international · 2023Pooled it
- 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 and uHealth · 2021Pooled it
- Article
- Evidence and User Considerations of Home Health Monitoring for Older Adults: Scoping Review.JMIR aging · 2022Article
- Digital Health Promotion and Prevention in Settings: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Spanish adaptation and validation of the User Version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale (uMARS).Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Article
- What Are We Measuring When We Evaluate Digital Interventions for Improving Lifestyle? A Scoping Meta-Review.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Telehealth Use among Community Health Centers and Cardio-Metabolic Health Outcomes.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Keeping the power on to home medical devices.PloS one · 2020Article
- Challenges in management and prevention of ischemic heart disease in low socioeconomic status people in LLMICs.BMC medicine · 2019Article
- Characteristics of Digital Health Studies Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov.JAMA internal medicine · 2019Article
- Response to "Development and Validation of the User Version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale (uMARS)".JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe conducted a meta-review to determine the reporting quality of user-centered digital interventions for the prevention and management of cardiometabolic conditions. MATERIALS AND
methodsUsing predetermined inclusion criteria, systematic reviews published between 2010 and 2015 were identified from 3 databases. To assess whether current evidence is sufficient to inform wider uptake and implementation of digital health programs, we assessed the quality of reporting of research findings using (1) endorsement of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, (2) a quality assessment framework (eg, Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool), and (3) 8 parameters of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials of Electronic and Mobile HEalth Applications and onLine TeleHealth (CONSORT-eHEALTH) guidelines (developed in 2010).
resultsOf the 33 systematic reviews covering social media, Web-based programs, mobile health programs, and composite modalities, 6 reported using the recommended PRISMA guidelines. Seven did not report using a quality assessment framework. Applying the CONSORT-EHEALTH guidelines, reporting was of mild to moderate strength. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first meta-review to provide a comprehensive analysis of the quality of reporting of research findings for a range of digital health interventions. Our findings suggest that the evidence base and quality of reporting in this rapidly developing field needs significant improvement in order to inform wider implementation and uptake.
conclusionThe inconsistent quality of reporting of digital health interventions for cardiometabolic outcomes may be a critical impediment to real-world implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.