ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2023
The Assessment of Medical Device Software Supporting Health Care Services for Chronic Patients in a Tertiary Hospital: Overarching Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Technology-based interventions to address internet addictive behaviors: systematic review.Discover mental health · 2025Review
- Personalized Mobile App-Based Program for Preparation and Recovery After Radical Prostatectomy: Initial Evidence for Improved Outcomes From a Prospective Nonrandomized Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Suitability of the Current Health Technology Assessment of Innovative Artificial Intelligence-Based Medical Devices: Scoping Literature Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Under the Tech Umbrella: Assessing the Landscape of Telemedicine Innovations (Telemechron Study).Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Toward Adoption of Health Risk Assessment in Population-Based and Clinical Scenarios: Lessons From JADECARE.International journal of integrated careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInnovative digital health tools are increasingly being evaluated and, in some instances, integrated at scale into health systems. However, the applicability of assessment methodologies in real-life scenarios to demonstrate value generation and consequently foster sustainable adoption of digitally enabled health interventions has some bottlenecks.
objectiveWe aimed to build on the process of premarket assessment of 4 digital health interventions piloted at the Hospital Clinic de Barcelona (HCB), as well as on the analysis of current medical device software regulations and postmarket surveillance in the European Union and United States in order to generate recommendations and lessons learnt for the sustainable adoption of digitally enabled health interventions.
methodsFour digital health interventions involving prototypes were piloted at the HCB (studies 1-4). Cocreation and quality improvement methodologies were used to consolidate a pragmatic evaluation method to assess the perceived usability and satisfaction of end users (both patients and health care professionals) by means of the System Usability Scale and the Net Promoter Score, including general questions about satisfaction. Analyses of both medical software device regulations and postmarket surveillance in the European Union and United States (2017-2021) were performed. Finally, an overarching analysis on lessons learnt was conducted considering 4 domains (technical, clinical, usability, and cost), as well as differentiating among 3 different eHealth strategies (telehealth, integrated care, and digital therapeutics).
resultsAmong the participant stakeholders, the System Usability Scale score was consistently higher in patients (studies 1, 2, 3, and 4: 78, 67, 56, and 76, respectively) than in health professionals (studies 2, 3, and 4: 52, 43, and 54, respectively). In general, use of the supporting digital health tools was recommended more by patients (studies 1, 2, 3, and 4: Net Promoter Scores of -3%, 31%, -21%, and 31%, respectively) than by professionals (studies 2, 3, and 4: Net Promoter Scores of -67%, 1%, and -80%, respectively). The overarching analysis resulted in pragmatic recommendations for the digital health evaluation domains and the eHealth strategies considered.
conclusionsLessons learnt on the digitalization of health resulted in practical recommendations that could contribute to future deployment experiences.
Indexed as
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.