Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37995121›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2023

Quality of Digital Health Interventions Across Different Health Care Domains: Secondary Data Analysis Study.

Maciej Hyzy, Raymond Bond, Maurice Mulvenna, Lu Bai, Alan Dix, Robert Daly, Anna-Lena Frey, Simon Leigh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

8 authors.

Maciej HyzySchool of Computing, Ulster University, Belfast, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0791-8976
Raymond BondSchool of Computing, Ulster University, Belfast, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1078-2232
Maurice MulvennaSchool of Computing, Ulster University, Belfast, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1554-0785
Lu BaiSchool of Electronics, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1242-5412
Alan DixSwansea University, Swansea, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-5242-7693
Robert DalyOrganisation for the Review of Care and Health Apps (ORCHA), Daresbury, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7360-0558
Anna-Lena FreyOrganisation for the Review of Care and Health Apps (ORCHA), Daresbury, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1653-3023
Simon LeighOrganisation for the Review of Care and Health Apps (ORCHA), Daresbury, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6843-6447

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere are more than 350,000 digital health interventions (DHIs) in the app stores. To ensure that they are effective and safe to use, they should be assessed for compliance with best practice standards.

objectiveThe objective of this paper was to examine and compare the compliance of DHIs with best practice standards and adherence to user experience (UX), professional and clinical assurance (PCA), and data privacy (DP).

methodsWe collected assessment data from 1574 DHIs using the Organisation for the Review of Care and Health Apps Baseline Review (OBR) assessment tool. As part of the assessment, each DHI received a score out of 100 for each of the abovementioned areas (ie, UX, PCA, and DP). These 3 OBR scores are combined to make up the overall ORCHA score (a proxy for quality). Inferential statistics, probability distributions, Kruskal-Wallis, Wilcoxon rank sum test, Cliff delta, and Dunn tests were used to conduct the data analysis.

resultsWe found that 57.3% (902/1574) of the DHIs had an Organisation for the Review of Care and Health Apps (ORCHA) score below the threshold of 65. The overall median OBR score (ORCHA score) for all DHIs was 61.5 (IQR 51.0-73.0) out of 100. A total of 46.2% (12/26) of DHI's health care domains had a median equal to or above the ORCHA threshold score of 65. For the 3 assessment areas (UX, DP, and PCA), DHIs scored the highest for the UX assessment 75.2 (IQR 70.0-79.6), followed by DP 65.1 (IQR 55.0-73.4) and PCA 49.6 (IQR 31.9-76.1). UX scores had the least variance (SD 13.9), while PCA scores had the most (SD 24.8). Respiratory and urology DHIs were consistently highly ranked in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Evidence Standards Framework tiers B and C based on their ORCHA score.

conclusionsThere is a high level of variability in the ORCHA scores of DHIs across different health care domains. This suggests that there is an urgent need to improve compliance with best practices in some health care areas. Possible explanations for the observed differences might include varied market maturity and commercial interests within the different health care domains. More investment to support the development of higher-quality DHIs in areas such as ophthalmology, allergy, women's health, sexual health, and dental care may be needed.

Indexed as

OphthalmologySecondary Data AnalysisData AnalysisFemaleHealth FacilitiesHumansPrivacydigital healthdigital health interventionsdigital health interventions scoringmHealth assessmentmobile healthORCHA assessmentOrganisation for the Review of Care and Health Appsquality assessmentquantifying DHIs

Identifiers

PMID37995121
PMCPMC10704310

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.