Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29430456›Full record

ReviewmHealth2017

Text-mining analysis of mHealth research.

Bunyamin Ozaydin, Ferhat Zengul, Nurettin Oner, Dursun Delen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in mHealth, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Bunyamin OzaydinDepartment of Health Services Administration, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Ferhat ZengulDepartment of Health Services Administration, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Nurettin OnerDepartment of Health Services Administration, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Dursun DelenDepartment of Management Science and Information Systems, Center for Health Systems Innovation, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, because of the advancements in communication and networking technologies, mobile technologies have been developing at an unprecedented rate. mHealth, the use of mobile technologies in medicine, and the related research has also surged parallel to these technological advancements. Although there have been several attempts to review mHealth research through manual processes such as systematic reviews, the sheer magnitude of the number of studies published in recent years makes this task very challenging. The most recent developments in machine learning and text mining offer some potential solutions to address this challenge by allowing analyses of large volumes of texts through semi-automated processes. The objective of this study is to analyze the evolution of mHealth research by utilizing text-mining and natural language processing (NLP) analyses. The study sample included abstracts of 5,644 mHealth research articles, which were gathered from five academic search engines by using search terms such as mobile health, and mHealth. The analysis used the Text Explorer module of JMP Pro 13 and an iterative semi-automated process involving tokenizing, phrasing, and terming. After developing the document term matrix (DTM) analyses such as single value decomposition (SVD), topic, and hierarchical document clustering were performed, along with the topic-informed document clustering approach. The results were presented in the form of word-clouds and trend analyses. There were several major findings regarding research clusters and trends. First, our results confirmed time-dependent nature of terminology use in mHealth research. For example, in earlier versus recent years the use of terminology changed from "mobile phone" to "smartphone" and from "applications" to "apps". Second, ten clusters for mHealth research were identified including (I) Clinical Research on Lifestyle Management, (II) Community Health, (III) Literature Review, (IV) Medical Interventions, (V) Research Design, (VI) Infrastructure, (VII) Applications, (VIII) Research and Innovation in Health Technologies, (IX) Sensor-based Devices and Measurement Algorithms, (X) Survey-based Research. Third, the trend analyses indicated the infrastructure cluster as the highest percentage researched area until 2014. The Research and Innovation in Health Technologies cluster experienced the largest increase in numbers of publications in recent years, especially after 2014. This study is unique because it is the only known study utilizing text-mining analyses to reveal the streams and trends for mHealth research. The fast growth in mobile technologies is expected to lead to higher numbers of studies focusing on mHealth and its implications for various healthcare outcomes. Findings of this study can be utilized by researchers in identifying areas for future studies.

Indexed as

literature reviewmHealthText mining

Identifiers

PMID29430456
PMCPMC5803006

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.