Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40212901›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in digital health2025

The gaps and challenges in digital health technology use as perceived by patients: a scoping review and narrative meta-synthesis.

Georgia Livieri, Eleni Mangina, Evangelos D Protopapadakis, Andrie G Panayiotou

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. An Introduction to AI for Clinicians: Tutorial.Interactive journal of medical research · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

4 authors.

Georgia LivieriDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, School of Health Sciences, Cyprus University of Technology, Limassol, Cyprus.
Eleni ManginaComputer Science and Informatics, School of Computer Science, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Evangelos D ProtopapadakisDepartment of Philosophy, School of Philosophy, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Andrie G PanayiotouDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, School of Health Sciences, Cyprus University of Technology, Limassol, Cyprus.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Digital health has revolutionized the landscape of healthcare through personalized care, moving away from the traditional approach of treating symptoms and conditions. Digital devices provide diagnostic accuracy and treatment effectiveness while equipping patients with control over their health and well-being. Although the growth of technology provides unprecedented opportunities, there are also certain issues arising from the use of such technology. This scoping review aimed to explore perceived gaps and challenges in the use of digital technology by patients and meta-synthesize them. Identifying such gaps and challenges will encourage new insights and understanding, leading to evidence-informed policies and practices. Methods: Three electronic databases were searched (Cinahl EBSCO, Pubmed, and Web of Science) for papers published in English between January 2010 and December 2023. A narrative meta-synthesis was performed. The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2009 checklist. Results: A total of 345 papers were retrieved and screened, with a noticeable increase in publication numbers after 2015. After the final selection, a total of 28 papers were included in the final meta-synthesis; these were published between 2015 and 2023. A total of 99 individual reports were included in the synthesis of these papers, comprising 25 identified gaps and 74 challenges. Discussion: Our meta-synthesis revealed several gaps and challenges related to patients' use of digital technology in health, including generational differences in digital propensity and deficiencies in the work process. In terms of ethics, the lack of trust in technology and data ownership was highlighted, with the meta-synthesis identifying issues in the realm of disruption of human rights. We, therefore, propose building a model for ethically aligned technology development and acceptance that considers human rights a crucial parameter in the digital healthcare ecosystem.

Indexed as

challengesdigital healthdigital healthcare technologyethical frameworkgapshuman rightspatients

Identifiers

PMID40212901
PMCPMC11983460

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.