Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35811758›Full record

ArticleDigital health

There's an app for that, but nobody's using it: Insights on improving patient access and adherence to digital therapeutics in Germany.

Florian Dahlhausen, Maximillian Zinner, Linn Bieske, Jan P Ehlers, Philip Boehme, Leonard Fehring

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

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
23.1field-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

57 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Mobile Interventions for Reducing Sedentary Behavior and Promoting Physical Activity Among Office Workers: Bibliometric Study.Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Florian DahlhausenFaculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3730-8992
Maximillian ZinnerFaculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.
Linn BieskeFaculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.
Jan P EhlersDidactics and Educational Research in Healthcare, Medical Department, Faculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6306-4173
Philip BoehmeFaculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.
Leonard FehringFaculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3322-3724
Witten/Herdecke University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Mobile health applications and their subset digital therapeutics-defined as evidence-based software interventions to prevent, manage, or treat a medical condition-offer great potential to improve patient care. However, such solutions often struggle to reach widespread adoption. Objective: This study seeks to explore healthcare stakeholders' roles and potential for fostering patient access and adherence to evidence-based digital therapeutics and thereby improve health outcomes from the perspective of digital therapeutics developers and distributors. Methods: Semi-structured qualitative and semiquantitative interviews were conducted with 19 experts from developers and distributors of digital therapeutics in Germany to discuss their perceived relevance of different healthcare stakeholders and strategies in promoting patient access and adherence to digital therapeutics. Results: Healthcare professionals were found to have the greatest potential to promote both access and patient adherence to digital therapeutics, followed by health insurers, pharmaceutical companies, and patients themselves. In terms of patient access, healthcare professionals have potential due to their ability to prescribe digital therapeutics. Other stakeholders' potential stems from their capacity to influence healthcare professionals prescription decision. In terms of patient adherence, only healthcare professionals are of high relevance by onboarding patients and monitoring digital therapeutics use. Most healthcare stakeholders currently do not fully leverage their potential. Further educating healthcare professionals and simplifying processes for them, empowering patients to seek treatment with digital therapeutics, and designing digital therapeutics' product features for better adherence can help improve patient access and adherence. Conclusions: Established healthcare stakeholders and digital therapeutics developers both need to take action to improve patient access and adherence to digital therapeutics. Several macro-level changes can support these efforts, including broader information dissemination, improved financial incentives, simplified prescription and activation processes, and a wider adoption of blended care and pay-for-performance payment models.

Indexed as

adherenceadoptionappsdigital healthdigital therapeuticsDTxhealthcare professionalsmHealthMobile healthreimbursement

Identifiers

PMID35811758
PMCPMC9260569
OpenAlexW4285037156

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.