Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30821690›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2019

eHealth Apps Replacing or Complementing Health Care Contacts: Scoping Review on Adverse Effects.

Wilhelmina Josepha Maria Stevens, Rob van der Sande, Lilian J Beijer, Maarten Gm Gerritsen, Willem Jj Assendelft

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Utility, barriers and facilitators to the use of connected health to support families impacted by paediatric cancer: a qualitative analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Wilhelmina Josepha Maria StevensFaculty of Health, Hogeschool van Arnhem en Nijmegen University of Applied Sciences, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3817-8424
Rob van der SandeFaculty of Health, Hogeschool van Arnhem en Nijmegen University of Applied Sciences, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1410-900X
Lilian J BeijerFaculty of Health, Hogeschool van Arnhem en Nijmegen University of Applied Sciences, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5995-9158
Maarten Gm GerritsenORCID 0000-0003-1160-4451
Willem Jj AssendelftDepartment for Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2966-3778

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of eHealth has increased tremendously in recent years. eHealth is generally considered to have a positive effect on health care quality and to be a promising alternative to face-to-face health care contacts. Surprisingly little is known about possible adverse effects of eHealth apps.

objectiveWe conducted a scoping review on empirical research into adverse effects of eHealth apps that aim to deliver health care at a distance. We investigated whether adverse effects were reported and the nature and quality of research into these possible adverse effects.

methodsFor this scoping review, we followed the five steps of Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review methodology. We searched specifically for studies into eHealth apps that replaced or complemented the face-to-face contact between a health professional and a patient in the context of treatment, health monitoring, or supporting self-management. Studies were included when eHealth and adverse effects were mentioned in the title or abstract and when empirical data on adverse effects were provided. All health conditions, with the exception of mental health conditions, all ages, and all sample sizes were included. We examined the literature published between December 2012 and August 2017 in the following databases: PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklists.

resultsOur search identified 79 papers that were potentially relevant; 11 studies met our inclusion criteria after screening. These studies differed in many ways and the majority were characterized by small research populations and low study quality. Adverse effects are rarely subject to systematic scientific research. So far, information on real adverse effects is mainly limited to incidental reporting or as a bycatch from qualitative pilot studies. Despite the shortage of solid research, we found some indications of possible negative impact on patient-centeredness and efficiency, such as less transparency in the relationship between health professionals and patients and time-consuming work routines.

conclusionsThere is a lack of high-quality empirical research on adverse effects of eHealth apps that replace or complement face-to-face care. While the development of eHealth apps is ongoing, the knowledge with regard to possible adverse effects is limited. The available research often focuses on efficacy, added value, implementation issues, use, and satisfaction, whereas adverse effects are underexplored. A better understanding of possible adverse effects could be a starting point in improving the positive impact of eHealth-based health care delivery.

Indexed as

Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsHumansQualitative ResearchQuality of Health CareTelemedicineadverse effectseHealthscoping review

Identifiers

PMID30821690
PMCPMC6421717

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.