Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36429832›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Health Recommender Systems Development, Usage, and Evaluation from 2010 to 2022: A Scoping Review.

Yao Cai, Fei Yu, Manish Kumar, Roderick Gladney, Javed Mostafa

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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.

Yao CaiSchool of Information and Library Science, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1034-5825
Fei YuSchool of Information and Library Science, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
Manish KumarPublic Health Leadership Program, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
Roderick GladneyCarolina Health Informatics Program, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
Javed MostafaSchool of Information and Library Science, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A health recommender system (HRS) provides a user with personalized medical information based on the user's health profile. This scoping review aims to identify and summarize the HRS development in the most recent decade by focusing on five key aspects: health domain, user, recommended item, recommendation technology, and system evaluation. We searched PubMed, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, Web of Science, and Scopus databases for English literature published between 2010 and 2022. Our study selection and data extraction followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. The following are the primary results: sixty-three studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the data analysis. These studies involved twenty-four health domains, with both patients and the general public as target users and ten major recommended items. The most adopted algorithm of recommendation technologies was the knowledge-based approach. In addition, fifty-nine studies reported system evaluations, in which two types of evaluation methods and three categories of metrics were applied. However, despite existing research progress on HRSs, the health domains, recommended items, and sample size of system evaluation have been limited. In the future, HRS research shall focus on dynamic user modelling, utilizing open-source knowledge bases, and evaluating the efficacy of HRSs using a large sample size. In conclusion, this study summarized the research activities and evidence pertinent to HRSs in the most recent ten years and identified gaps in the existing research landscape. Further work shall address the gaps and continue improving the performance of HRSs to empower users in terms of healthcare decision making and self-management.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsGovernment ProgramsHumanshealth recommender systemrecommendation technologyresearch areasystem evaluationuser model

Identifiers

PMID36429832
PMCPMC9690602

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.