Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41341985›Full record

ReviewJMIR neurotechnology2023

Remote Testing Apps for Multiple Sclerosis Patients: Scoping Review of Published Articles and Systematic Search and Review of Public Smartphone Apps.

Jacob B Michaud, Cameron Penny, Olivia Cull, Eric Hervet, Ludivine Chamard-Witkowski

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR neurotechnology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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.

Jacob B MichaudDepartment of Internal Medicine Dalhousie University Halifax, NS Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4755-2390
Cameron PennyFaculty of Medicine Dalhousie University Halifax, NS Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3748-4881
Olivia CullCentre de Formation Médicale du Nouveau-Brunswick Moncton, NB Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1339-7361
Eric HervetDepartment of Computer Science Université de Moncton Moncton, NB Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3117-6506
Ludivine Chamard-WitkowskiCentre de Formation Médicale du Nouveau-Brunswick Moncton, NB Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2676-6392

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Many apps have been designed to remotely assess clinical status and monitor symptom evolution in persons with multiple sclerosis (MS). These may one day serve as an adjunct for in-person assessment of persons with MS, providing valuable insight into the disease course that is not well captured by cross-sectional snapshots obtained from clinic visits. Objective: This study sought to review the current literature surrounding apps used for remote monitoring of persons with MS. Methods: A scoping review of published articles was conducted to identify and evaluate the literature published regarding the use of apps for monitoring of persons with MS. PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to January 2022. Cohort studies, feasibility studies, and randomized controlled trials were included in this review. All pediatric studies, single case studies, poster presentations, opinion pieces, and commentaries were excluded. Studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, when applicable. Key findings were grouped in categories (convergence to neurological exam, feasibility of implementation, impact of weather, and practice effect), and trends are presented. In a parallel systematic search, the Canadian Apple App Store and Google Play Store were searched to identify relevant apps that are available but have yet to be formally studied and published in peer-reviewed publications. Results: We included 18 articles and 18 apps. Although many MS-related apps exist, only 10 apps had published literature supporting their use. Convergence between app-based testing and the neurological exam was examined in 12 articles. Most app-based tests focused on physical disability and cognition, although other domains such as ambulation, balance, visual acuity, and fatigue were also evaluated. Overall, correlations between the app versions of standardized tests and their traditional counterparts were moderate to strong. Some novel app-based tests had a stronger correlation with clinician-derived outcomes than traditional testing. App-based testing correlated well with the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite but less so with the Expanded Disability Status Scale; the latter correlated to a greater extent with patient quality of life questionnaire scores. Conclusions: Although limited by a small number of included studies and study heterogeneity, the findings of this study suggest that app-based testing demonstrates adequate convergence to traditional in-person assessment and may be used as an adjunct to and perhaps in lieu of specific neurological exam metrics documented at clinic visits, particularly if the latter is not readily accessible for persons with MS.

Indexed as

appdigital healtheHealthmHealthmobile applicationmobile phonemultiple sclerosistelehealth

Identifiers

PMID41341985
PMCPMC12671287

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.