Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32904379›Full record

ReviewNPJ digital medicine2020

Challenges for the evaluation of digital health solutions-A call for innovative evidence generation approaches.

Chaohui Guo, Hutan Ashrafian, Saira Ghafur, Gianluca Fontana, Clarissa Gardner, Matthew Prime

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in NPJ digital medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 165 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
165citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
49.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

165 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 315 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. A life-cycle approach to digital health technology assessment.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

105 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Chaohui GuoRoche Diagnostics, Basel, Switzerland.
Hutan AshrafianImperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1668-0672
Saira GhafurImperial College London, London, UK.
Gianluca FontanaImperial College London, London, UK.
Clarissa GardnerImperial College London, London, UK.
Matthew PrimeRoche Diagnostics, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-8717-0130
Imperial College London · GBRoche (Switzerland) · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The field of digital health, and its meaning, has evolved rapidly over the last 20 years. For this article we followed the most recent definition provided by FDA in 2020. Emerging solutions offers tremendous potential to positively transform the healthcare sector. Despite the growing number of applications, however, the evolution of methodologies to perform timely, cost-effective and robust evaluations have not kept pace. It remains an industry-wide challenge to provide credible evidence, therefore, hindering wider adoption. Conventional methodologies, such as clinical trials, have seldom been applied and more pragmatic approaches are needed. In response, several academic centers such as researchers from the Institute of Global Health Innovation at Imperial College London have initiated a digital health clinical simulation test bed to explore new approaches for evidence gathering relevant to solution type and maturity. The aim of this article is to: (1) Review current research approaches and discuss their limitations; (2) Discuss challenges faced by different stakeholders in undertaking evaluations; and (3) Call for new approaches to facilitate the safe and responsible growth of the digital health sector.

Indexed as

Health policyTranslational research

Identifiers

PMID32904379
PMCPMC7453198
OpenAlexW3080862813

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.