ReviewNPJ digital medicine2022
A systematic review of healthcare provider-targeted mobile applications for non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries.
Review in NPJ digital medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health workers' adoption of digital health technology in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2025Pooled it
- Health Providers' Perceptions and Experiences of Using mHealth for Chronic Noncommunicable Diseases: Qualitative Systematic Review and Meta-Synthesis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- Is Digital Healthcare Better Than None? The Digital Health Technology Dilemma in Low-Income Countries.Asian bioethics review · 2026Article
- Design and Evaluation of ACAFiB-APP, a clinical decision support system for anticoagulant considerations in patients with atrial fibrillation.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of text messages in the adherence to COVID-19 prevention practices: a quasi-experimental study.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2025Article
- Article
- Healthcare provider-targeted mobile applications to diagnose, screen, or monitor communicable diseases of public health importance in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review.PLOS digital health · 2023Article
- A full-STAC remedy for global digital health transformation: open standards, technologies, architectures and content.Oxford open digital health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Mobile health (mHealth) interventions hold promise for addressing the epidemic of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) by assisting healthcare providers managing these disorders in low-resource settings. We aimed to systematically identify and assess provider-facing mHealth applications used to screen for, diagnose, or monitor NCDs in LMICs. In this systematic review, we searched the indexing databases of PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central for studies published between January 2007 and October 2019. We included studies of technologies that were: (i) mobile phone- or tablet-based, (ii) able to screen for, diagnose, or monitor an NCD of public health importance in LMICs, and (iii) targeting health professionals as users. We extracted disease type, intervention purpose, target population, study population, sample size, study methodology, technology stage, country of development, operating system, and cost. Our initial search retrieved 13,262 studies, 315 of which met inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Cardiology was the most common clinical domain of the technologies evaluated, with 89 publications. mHealth innovations were predominantly developed using Apple's iOS operating system. Cost data were provided in only 50 studies, but most technologies for which this information was available cost less than 20 USD. Only 24 innovations targeted the ten NCDs responsible for the greatest number of disability-adjusted life years lost globally. Most publications evaluated products created in high-income countries. Reported mHealth technologies are well-developed, but their implementation in LMICs faces operating system incompatibility and a relative neglect of NCDs causing the greatest disease burden.
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.