Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42343944›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2026

Digital health tools and point solutions-pitfalls in population health program measurement.

Carolyn Langer, James Shaw, Wiljeana Glover

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Carolyn LangerDepartment of Family Medicine & Community Health, UMass Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States.
James ShawUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Wiljeana GloverBabson College, Worcester, MA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Digital health tools are generally poorly regulated and often lack strong research evidence, posing challenges for purchasers of point solutions such as employer groups and insurers. Point solutions, which are digital tools designed to manage health-related conditions, to promote wellness, and/or to drive member engagement, present unique challenges for purchasers. In this Review we provide a concise summary of 10 pitfalls in the interpretation of messaging from digital health vendors for purchasers seeking to make good investments in point solutions. We highlight existing population health research approaches that digital health vendors can employ to mitigate these pitfalls. We conclude with a recommendation that employers and health care entities gain clarity on goals related to outcomes they hope to achieve with digital health technologies, and make purchasing decisions based on a framework and objective data supporting the desired outcomes specifically related to those goals.

Indexed as

digital healthdigital health procurementeHealthplan sponsorpoint solutionpopulation healthuser engagement

Identifiers

PMID42343944
PMCPMC13288481

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.