Showing 1 to 10 of 1915 records(fetched in 2.999 seconds)
TitleThe Use of Mobile Apps and SMS Messaging as Physical and Mental Health Interventions: Systematic Review.
AuthorsRathbone, AL; Prescott, J
JournalJournal of medical Internet research
Publication Date24 Aug 2017
Date Added to PubMed26 Aug 2017
AbstractThe initial introduction of the World Wide Web in 1990 brought around the biggest change in information acquisition. Due to the abundance of devices and ease of access they subsequently allow, the utility of mobile health (mHealth) has never been more endemic. A substantial amount of interactive and psychoeducational apps are readily available to download concerning a wide range of health issues. mHealth has the potential to reduce waiting times for appointments; eradicate the need to meet in person with a clinician, successively diminishing the workload of mental health professionals; be more cost effective to practices; and encourage self-care tactics. Previous research has given valid evidence with empirical studies proving the effectiveness of physical and mental health interventions using mobile apps. Alongside apps, there is evidence to show that receiving short message service (SMS) messages, which entail psychoeducation, medication reminders, and links to useful informative Web pages can also be advantageous to a patient's mental and physical well-being. Available mHealth apps and SMS services and their ever improving quality necessitates a systematic review in the area in reference to reduction of symptomology, adherence to intervention, and usability. The aim of this review was to study the efficacy, usability, and feasibility of mobile apps and SMS messages as mHealth interventions for self-guided care. A systematic literature search was carried out in JMIR, PubMed, PsychINFO, PsychARTICLES, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, and SAGE. The search spanned from January 2008 to January 2017. The primary outcome measures consisted of weight management, (pregnancy) smoking cessation, medication adherence, depression, anxiety and stress. Where possible, adherence, feasibility, and usability outcomes of the apps or SMS services were evaluated. Between-group and within-group effect sizes (Cohen d) for the mHealth intervention method group were determined. A total of 27 studies, inclusive of 4658 participants were reviewed. The papers included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (n=19), within-group studies (n=7), and 1 within-group study with qualitative aspect. Studies show improvement in physical health and significant reductions of anxiety, stress, and depression. Within-group and between-group effect sizes ranged from 0.05-3.37 (immediately posttest), 0.05-3.25 (1-month follow-up), 0.08-3.08 (2-month follow-up), 0.00-3.10 (3-month follow-up), and 0.02-0.27 (6-month follow-up). Usability and feasibility of mHealth interventions, where reported, also gave promising, significant results. The review shows the promising and emerging efficacy of using mobile apps and SMS text messaging as mHealth interventions.
Linkhttp://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.7740
TitleThe cost-effectiveness of digital health interventions: A systematic review of the literature.
AuthorsGentili, A; Failla, G; Melnyk, A; Puleo, V; Tanna, GLD; Ricciardi, W; Cascini, F
JournalFrontiers in public health
Publication Date1 Dec 2022
Date Added to PubMed30 Aug 2022
AbstractDigital health interventions have significant potential to improve safety, efficacy, and quality of care, reducing waste in healthcare costs. Despite these premises, the evidence regarding cost and effectiveness of digital tools in health is scarce and limited. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of digital health interventions and to assess whether the studies meet the established quality criteria. We queried PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases for articles in English published from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2020 that performed economic evaluations of digital health technologies. The methodological rigorousness of studies was assessed with the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2009 checklist. Search identified 1,476 results, 552 of which were selected for abstract and 35 were included in this review. The studies were heterogeneous by country (mostly conducted in upper and upper-middle income countries), type of eHealth intervention, method of implementation, and reporting perspectives. The qualitative analysis identified the economic and effectiveness evaluation of six different types of interventions: (1) seventeen studies on new video-monitoring service systems; (2) five studies on text messaging interventions; (3) five studies on web platforms and digital health portals; (4) two studies on telephone support; (5) three studies on new mobile phone-based systems and applications; and (6) three studies on digital technologies and innovations. Findings on cost-effectiveness of digital interventions showed a growing body of evidence and suggested a generally favorable effect in terms of costs and health outcomes. However, due to the heterogeneity across study methods, the comparison between interventions still remains difficult. Further research based on a standardized approach is needed in order to methodically analyze incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, costs, and health benefits.
Linkhttp://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.787135
TitleImpact of mHealth chronic disease management on treatment adherence and patient outcomes: a systematic review.
AuthorsHamine, S; Gerth-Guyette, E; Faulx, D; Green, BB; Ginsburg, AS
JournalJournal of medical Internet research
Publication Date24 Feb 2015
Date Added to PubMed25 Mar 2015
AbstractAdherence to chronic disease management is critical to achieving improved health outcomes, quality of life, and cost-effective health care. As the burden of chronic diseases continues to grow globally, so does the impact of non-adherence. Mobile technologies are increasingly being used in health care and public health practice (mHealth) for patient communication, monitoring, and education, and to facilitate adherence to chronic diseases management. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to evaluate the effectiveness of mHealth in supporting the adherence of patients to chronic diseases management ("mAdherence"), and the usability, feasibility, and acceptability of mAdherence tools and platforms in chronic disease management among patients and health care providers. We searched PubMed, Embase, and EBSCO databases for studies that assessed the role of mAdherence in chronic disease management of diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, and chronic lung diseases from 1980 through May 2014. Outcomes of interest included effect of mHealth on patient adherence to chronic diseases management, disease-specific clinical outcomes after intervention, and the usability, feasibility, and acceptability of mAdherence tools and platforms in chronic disease management among target end-users. In all, 107 articles met all inclusion criteria. Short message service was the most commonly used mAdherence tool in 40.2% (43/107) of studies. Usability, feasibility, and acceptability or patient preferences for mAdherence interventions were assessed in 57.9% (62/107) of studies and found to be generally high. A total of 27 studies employed randomized controlled trial (RCT) methods to assess impact on adherence behaviors, and significant improvements were observed in 15 of those studies (56%). Of the 41 RCTs that measured effects on disease-specific clinical outcomes, significant improvements between groups were reported in 16 studies (39%). There is potential for mHealth tools to better facilitate adherence to chronic disease management, but the evidence supporting its current effectiveness is mixed. Further research should focus on understanding and improving how mHealth tools can overcome specific barriers to adherence.
Linkhttp://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.3951
TitleEffectiveness of Telehealth in Rural and Remote Emergency Departments: Systematic Review.
AuthorsTsou, C; Robinson, S; Boyd, J; Jamieson, A; Blakeman, R; Yeung, J; McDonnell, J; Waters, S; Bosich, K; Hendrie, D
JournalJournal of medical Internet research
Publication Date26 Nov 2021
Date Added to PubMed30 Nov 2021
AbstractEmergency telehealth has been used to improve access of patients residing in rural and remote areas to specialist care in the hope of mitigating the significant health disparities that they experience. Patient disposition decisions in rural and remote emergency departments (EDs) can be complex and largely dependent on the expertise and experience available at local (receiving-end) hospitals. Although there has been some synthesis of evidence of the effectiveness of emergency telehealth in clinical practice in rural and remote EDs for nonacute presentations, there has been limited evaluation of the influence of contextual factors such as clinical area and acuity of presentation on these findings. The aims of this systematic review are to examine the outcome measures used in studying the effectiveness of telehealth in rural and remote EDs and to analyze the clinical context in which these outcome measures were used and interpreted. The search strategy used Medical Subject Headings and equivalent lists of subject descriptors to find articles covering 4 key domains: telehealth or telemedicine, EDs, effectiveness, and rural and remote. Studies were selected using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes of Interest, and Study Design framework. This search strategy was applied to MEDLINE (Ovid), Cochrane Library, Scopus, CINAHL, ProQuest, and EconLit, as well as the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination databases (eg, National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database) for the search period from January 1, 1990, to May 23, 2020. Qualitative synthesis was performed on the outcome measures used in the included studies, in particular the clinical contexts within which they were interpreted. A total of 21 full-text articles were included for qualitative analysis. Telehealth use in rural and remote EDs demonstrated effectiveness in achieving improved or equivalent clinical effectiveness, appropriate care processes, and-depending on the context-improvement in speed of care, as well as favorable service use patterns. The definition of effectiveness varied across the clinical areas and contexts of the studies, and different measures have been used to affirm the safety and clinical effectiveness of telehealth in rural and remote EDs. The acuity of patient presentation emerged as a dominant consideration in the interpretation of interlinking time-sensitive clinical effectiveness and patient disposition measures such as transfer and discharge rates, local hospital admission, length of stay, and ED length of stay. These, together with clinical area and acuity of presentation, are the outcome determination criteria that emerged from this review. Emergency telehealth studies typically use multiple outcome measures to determine the effectiveness of the services. The outcome determination criteria that emerged from this analysis are useful when defining the favorable direction for each outcome measure of interest. The findings of this review have implications for emergency telehealth service design and policies. PROSPERO CRD42019145903; https://tinyurl.com/ndmkr8ry.
Linkhttp://doi.org/10.2196/30632
TitleHealth workers' perceptions and experiences of using mHealth technologies to deliver primary healthcare services: a qualitative evidence synthesis.
AuthorsOdendaal, WA; Anstey Watkins, J; Leon, N; Goudge, J; Griffiths, F; Tomlinson, M; Daniels, K
JournalThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews
Publication Date26 Mar 2020
Date Added to PubMed28 Mar 2020
AbstractMobile health (mHealth), refers to healthcare practices supported by mobile devices, such as mobile phones and tablets. Within primary care, health workers often use mobile devices to register clients, track their health, and make decisions about care, as well as to communicate with clients and other health workers. An understanding of how health workers relate to, and experience mHealth, can help in its implementation. To synthesise qualitative research evidence on health workers' perceptions and experiences of using mHealth technologies to deliver primary healthcare services, and to develop hypotheses about why some technologies are more effective than others. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Science Citation Index and Social Sciences Citation Index in January 2018. We searched Global Health in December 2015. We screened the reference lists of included studies and key references and searched seven sources for grey literature (16 February to 5 March 2018). We re-ran the search strategies in February 2020. We screened these records and any studies that we identified as potentially relevant are awaiting classification. We included studies that used qualitative data collection and analysis methods. We included studies of mHealth programmes that were part of primary healthcare services. These services could be implemented in public or private primary healthcare facilities, community and workplace, or the homes of clients. We included all categories of health workers, as well as those persons who supported the delivery and management of the mHealth programmes. We excluded participants identified as technical staff who developed and maintained the mHealth technology, without otherwise being involved in the programme delivery. We included studies conducted in any country. We assessed abstracts, titles and full-text papers according to the inclusion criteria. We found 53 studies that met the inclusion criteria and sampled 43 of these for our analysis. For the 43 sampled studies, we extracted information, such as country, health worker category, and the mHealth technology. We used a thematic analysis process. We used GRADE-CERQual to assess our confidence in the findings. Most of the 43 included sample studies were from low- or middle-income countries. In many of the studies, the mobile devices had decision support software loaded onto them, which showed the steps the health workers had to follow when they provided health care. Other uses included in-person and/or text message communication, and recording clients' health information. Almost half of the studies looked at health workers' use of mobile devices for mother, child, and newborn health. We have moderate or high confidence in the following findings. mHealth changed how health workers worked with each other: health workers appreciated being more connected to colleagues, and thought that this improved co-ordination and quality of care. However, some described problems when senior colleagues did not respond or responded in anger. Some preferred face-to-face connection with colleagues. Some believed that mHealth improved their reporting, while others compared it to "big brother watching". mHealth changed how health workers delivered care: health workers appreciated how mHealth let them take on new tasks, work flexibly, and reach clients in difficult-to-reach areas. They appreciated mHealth when it improved feedback, speed and workflow, but not when it was slow or time consuming. Some health workers found decision support software useful; others thought it threatened their clinical skills. Most health workers saw mHealth as better than paper, but some preferred paper. Some health workers saw mHealth as creating more work. mHealth led to new forms of engagement and relationships with clients and communities: health workers felt that communicating with clients by mobile phone improved care and their relationships with clients, but felt that some clients needed face-to-face contact. Health workers were aware of the importance of protecting confidential client information when using mobile devices. Some health workers did not mind being contacted by clients outside working hours, while others wanted boundaries. Health workers described how some community members trusted health workers that used mHealth while others were sceptical. Health workers pointed to problems when clients needed to own their own phones. Health workers' use and perceptions of mHealth could be influenced by factors tied to costs, the health worker, the technology, the health system and society, poor network access, and poor access to electricity: some health workers did not mind covering extra costs. Others complained that phone credit was not delivered on time. Health workers who were accustomed to using mobile phones were sometimes more positive towards mHealth. Others with less experience, were sometimes embarrassed about making mistakes in front of clients or worried about job security. Health workers wanted training, technical support, user-friendly devices, and systems that were integrated into existing electronic health systems. The main challenges health workers experienced were poor network connections, access to electricity, and the cost of recharging phones. Other problems included damaged phones. Factors outside the health system also influenced how health workers experienced mHealth, including language, gender, and poverty issues. Health workers felt that their commitment to clients helped them cope with these challenges. Our findings propose a nuanced view about mHealth programmes. The complexities of healthcare delivery and human interactions defy simplistic conclusions on how health workers will perceive and experience their use of mHealth. Perceptions reflect the interplay between the technology, contexts, and human attributes. Detailed descriptions of the programme, implementation processes and contexts, alongside effectiveness studies, will help to unravel this interplay to formulate hypotheses regarding the effectiveness of mHealth.
Linkhttp://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011942.pub2
TitleEffectiveness of Mobile Health Interventions on Diabetes and Obesity Treatment and Management: Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews.
AuthorsWang, Y; Min, J; Khuri, J; Xue, H; Xie, B; A Kaminsky, L; J Cheskin, L
JournalJMIR mHealth and uHealth
Publication Date28 Apr 2020
Date Added to PubMed29 Apr 2020
AbstractDiabetes and obesity have become epidemics and costly chronic diseases. The impact of mobile health (mHealth) interventions on diabetes and obesity management is promising; however, studies showed varied results in the efficacy of mHealth interventions. This review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of mHealth interventions for diabetes and obesity treatment and management on the basis of evidence reported in reviews and meta-analyses and to provide recommendations for future interventions and research. We systematically searched the PubMed, IEEE Xplore Digital Library, and Cochrane databases for systematic reviews published between January 1, 2005, and October 1, 2019. We analyzed 17 reviews, which assessed 55,604 original intervention studies, that met the inclusion criteria. Of those, 6 reviews were included in our meta-analysis. The reviews primarily focused on the use of mobile apps and text messaging and the self-monitoring and management function of mHealth programs in patients with diabetes and obesity. All reviews examined changes in biomarkers, and some reviews assessed treatment adherence (n=7) and health behaviors (n=9). Although the effectiveness of mHealth interventions varied widely by study, all reviews concluded that mHealth was a feasible option and had the potential for improving patient health when compared with standard care, especially for glycemic control (-0.3% to -0.5% greater reduction in hemoglobin A1c) and weight reduction (-1.0 kg to -2.4 kg body weight). Overall, the existing 6 meta-analysis studies showed pooled favorable effects of these mHealth interventions (-0.79, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.42; I2=90.5). mHealth interventions are promising, but there is limited evidence about their effectiveness in glycemic control and weight reduction. Future research to develop evidence-based mHealth strategies should use valid measures and rigorous study designs. To enhance the effectiveness of mHealth interventions, future studies are warranted for the optimal formats and the frequency of contacting patients, better tailoring of messages, and enhancing usability, which places a greater emphasis on maintaining effectiveness over time.
Linkhttp://doi.org/10.2196/15400
TitleEngaging Children and Young People in Digital Mental Health Interventions: Systematic Review of Modes of Delivery, Facilitators, and Barriers.
AuthorsLiverpool, S; Mota, CP; Sales, CMD; Čuš, A; Carletto, S; Hancheva, C; Sousa, S; Cerón, SC; Moreno-Peral, P; Pietrabissa, G; Moltrecht, B; Ulberg, R; Ferreira, N; Edbrooke-Childs, J
JournalJournal of medical Internet research
Publication Date23 Jun 2020
Date Added to PubMed23 May 2020
AbstractThere is a high prevalence of children and young people (CYP) experiencing mental health (MH) problems. Owing to accessibility, affordability, and scalability, an increasing number of digital health interventions (DHIs) have been developed and incorporated into MH treatment. Studies have shown the potential of DHIs to improve MH outcomes. However, the modes of delivery used to engage CYP in digital MH interventions may differ, with implications for the extent to which findings pertain to the level of engagement with the DHI. Knowledge of the various modalities could aid in the development of interventions that are acceptable and feasible. This review aimed to (1) identify modes of delivery used in CYP digital MH interventions, (2) explore influencing factors to usage and implementation, and (3) investigate ways in which the interventions have been evaluated and whether CYP engage in DHIs. A literature search was performed in the Cochrane Library, Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), and PsycINFO databases using 3 key concepts "child and adolescent mental health," "digital intervention," and "engagement." Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed using rigorous inclusion criteria and screening by at least two reviewers. The selected articles were assessed for quality using the mixed methods appraisal tool, and data were extracted to address the review aims. Data aggregation and synthesis were conducted and presented as descriptive numerical summaries and a narrative synthesis, respectively. This study identified 6 modes of delivery from 83 articles and 71 interventions for engaging CYP: (1) websites, (2) games and computer-assisted programs, (3) apps, (4) robots and digital devices, (5) virtual reality, and (6) mobile text messaging. Overall, 2 themes emerged highlighting intervention-specific and person-specific barriers and facilitators to CYP's engagement. These themes encompassed factors such as suitability, usability, and acceptability of the DHIs and motivation, capability, and opportunity for the CYP using DHIs. The literature highlighted that CYP prefer DHIs with features such as videos, limited text, ability to personalize, ability to connect with others, and options to receive text message reminders. The findings of this review suggest a high average retention rate of 79% in studies involving various DHIs. The development of DHIs is increasing and may be of interest to CYP, particularly in the area of MH treatment. With continuous technological advancements, it is important to know which modalities may increase engagement and help CYP who are facing MH problems. This review identified the existing modalities and highlighted the influencing factors from the perspective of CYP. This knowledge provides information that can be used to design and evaluate new interventions and offers important theoretical insights into how and why CYP engage in DHIs.
Linkhttp://doi.org/10.2196/16317
TitlemHealth SMS text messaging interventions and to promote medication adherence: an integrative review.
AuthorsDeKoekkoek, T; Given, B; Given, CW; Ridenour, K; Schueller, M; Spoelstra, SL
JournalJournal of clinical nursing
Publication Date1 Oct 2015
Date Added to PubMed29 Jul 2015
AbstractThis article is an integrative review of the evidence for mobile health Short Message Service text messages as an innovative and emerging intervention to promote medication adherence. Authors completed this review to draw conclusions and implications towards establishing a scientific foundation for use of text messages to promote medication adherence, thus informing clinical practice. The World Health Organization has identified medication adherence as a priority global problem. Text messages are emerging as an effective means of improving health behaviours and in some diseases to promote medication adherence. However, a gap in the literature indicates lack of evidence in guiding theories and content of text messages, which should be synthesised prior to use in clinical practice. Integrative review. Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Excerpta Medica dataBASE, Scopus, the Cochrane Library and PubMed were searched for relevant studies between 2004-2014. Inclusion criteria were (1) implementation of a text-message intervention and (2) medication adherence to a prescribed oral medication as a primary outcome. Articles were assessed for quality of methodology and measures of adherence. An integrative review process was used to perform analysis. Thirteen articles meeting the inclusion criteria are included in this review. Nine of 13 studies found adherence rates improved between 15·3-17·8% when using text messages to promote medication adherence. Text messages that were standardised, tailored, one- or two-way and timed either daily to medication regimen, weekly or monthly showed improvement in medication adherence. This review established a scientific basis for text messages as an intervention to improve medication adherence across multiple diseases. Future large rigorous randomised trials are needed to further test text messaging interventions. This review provides clinicians with the state of the science with regard to text messaging interventions that promote medication adherence. A description of intervention components are provided to aid nurses in development of text messages and in translating evidence into practice.
Linkhttp://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.12918
TitleThe Acceptability and Feasibility of Using Text Messaging to Support the Delivery of Physical Health Care in those Suffering from a Psychotic Disorder: a Review of the Literature.
AuthorsGriffiths, H
JournalThe Psychiatric quarterly
Publication Date1 Dec 2020
Date Added to PubMed25 Sep 2020
AbstractThose suffering with serious mental illness (SMI), such as psychotic disorders, experience life expectancy 15 years shorter than the general population. Cardiovascular disease is the biggest cause of death in those with psychotic disease and many risk factors may be limited by healthy lifestyle choices. Text messaging interventions represent mobile health (mHealth), a nascent way to deliver physical health care to those suffering with a psychotic disorder. This paper aims to review the literature on the feasibility of text messaging to support the delivery of physical health care in those with a psychotic disorder. A thorough electronic database literature review of Medline via Ovid, Embase, APA Psycinfo, Scopus, Cochrane and Web of Science was conducted. Articles were included if text messaging was used as an intervention targeting the physical health of patients with psychotic disorders. A final sample of 11 articles satisfied the eligibility criteria, of which, 3 were ongoing randomised controlled trials. Of the 8 completed trials, all demonstrated the promising feasibility of text messaging, assessed via quotes, conversation samples, response rates, questionnaires or directly based on physical results. 36% of studies analysed those with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, 55% with SMI and 9% with schizophrenia and psychotic disorders, mood disorders or anxiety disorders. Text messaging was used as motivation or reminders (91%), service delivery (27%) or social support (27%) with studies targeting multiple themes simultaneously. This review highlights compelling evidence for the feasibility of text messaging for improvement of physical health in those suffering with psychotic disorders.
Linkhttp://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-020-09847-x
TitleScoping review and evaluation of SMS/text messaging platforms for mHealth projects or clinical interventions.
AuthorsIribarren, SJ; Brown, W; Giguere, R; Stone, P; Schnall, R; Staggers, N; Carballo-Diéguez, A
JournalInternational journal of medical informatics
Publication Date1 May 2017
Date Added to PubMed30 Mar 2017
AbstractMobile technology supporting text messaging interventions (TMIs) continues to evolve, presenting challenges for researchers and healthcare professionals who need to choose software solutions to best meet their program needs. The objective of this review was to systematically identify and compare text messaging platforms and to summarize their advantages and disadvantages as described in peer-reviewed literature. A scoping review was conducted using four steps: 1) identify currently available platforms through online searches and in mHealth repositories; 2) expand evaluation criteria of an mHealth mobile messaging toolkit and integrate prior user experiences as researchers; 3) evaluate each platform's functions and features based on the expanded criteria and a vendor survey; and 4) assess the documentation of platform use in the peer-review literature. Platforms meeting inclusion criteria were assessed independently by three reviewers and discussed until consensus was reached. The PRISMA guidelines were followed to report findings. Of the 1041 potentially relevant search results, 27 platforms met inclusion criteria. Most were excluded because they were not platforms (e.g., guides, toolkits, reports, or SMS gateways). Of the 27 platforms, only 12 were identified in existing mHealth repositories, 10 from Google searches, while five were found in both. The expanded evaluation criteria included 22 items. Results indicate no uniform presentation of platform features and functions, often making these difficult to discern. Fourteen of the platforms were reported as open source, 10 focused on health care and 16 were tailored to meet needs of low resource settings (not mutually exclusive). Fifteen platforms had do-it-yourself setup (programming not required) while the remainder required coding/programming skills or setups could be built to specification by the vendor. Frequently described features included data security and access to the platform via cloud-based systems. Pay structures and reported targeted end-users varied. Peer-reviewed publications listed only 6 of the 27 platforms across 21 publications. The majority of these articles reported the name of the platform used but did not describe advantages or disadvantages. Searching for and comparing mHealth platforms for TMIs remains a challenge. The results of this review can serve as a resource for researchers and healthcare professionals wanting to integrate TMIs into health interventions. Steps to identify, compare and assess advantages and disadvantages are outlined for consideration. Expanded evaluation criteria can be used by future researchers. Continued and more comprehensive platform tools should be integrated into mHealth repositories. Detailed descriptions of platform advantages and disadvantages are needed when mHealth researchers publish findings to expand the body of research on TMI tools for healthcare. Standardized descriptions and features are recommended for vendor sites.
Linkhttp://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.01.017
MNCHFPRHHIV/AIDSMalariaNoncommunicable diseaseCOVID-19Decision-makingEducation & trainingBehavior changeGovernancePrivacy & securityEquityCHWsYouth & adolescentsSystematic reviewsProtocols & research designMedical RecordsLaboratoryPharmacyHuman ResourcesmHealthSMSChatbotsAI