Dataset Information

MHealth Approaches in Managing Skin Cancer: Systematic Review of Evidence-Based Research Using Integrative Mapping.

ABSTRACT:

Background

mHealth, which encompasses mobile health technologies and interventions, is rapidly evolving in various medical specialties, and its impact is evident in oncology. In particular, mHealth has established itself as a prominent part of dermatology for cancer screening. Intensified research to seek its use and effectiveness in each phase of the skin cancer continuum is needed in this fast-growing field of teledermatology.

Objective

The purpose of this review was to describe current trends in research addressing the integration of mHealth and its contributions across the skin cancer continuum.

Methods

A systematic review framework was applied to the search using three electronic databases: PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. We extensively reviewed appropriate studies regarding skin cancer and mobile technology published between 2007 and 2017. Studies of the role and impact of mobile technology in the prevention and management of skin cancer were included. We selected 18 studies adhering to the inclusion and exclusion criteria for analysis.

Results

Of the 18 studies, 5 (28%) evaluated prevention interventions, 6 (33%) assessed diagnostic accuracy, and 7 (39%) pertained to feasibility in the context of mHealth approaches for skin cancer care. These studies portray the potential of mobile teledermatology in the prevention and management of skin cancer. However, not all phases of skin cancer involve mHealth, and not all have been addressed by research.

Conclusions

This review extends our knowledge not only on the contributions of mHealth technologies, but also on their integration in different phases of skin cancer care. To optimize the effectiveness of mHealth in dermatology, larger numbers of robust, evidence-based studies on teledermatology implementations, distributed evenly across the care continuum, should be conducted so that research can be expanded to systematic reviews.

SUBMITTER: Choi J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6096168 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

mHealth Approaches in Managing Skin Cancer: Systematic Review of Evidence-Based Research Using Integrative Mapping.

Choi Jihye J Cho Youngtae Y Woo Hyekyung H

JMIR mHealth and uHealth 20180802 8

<h4>Background</h4>mHealth, which encompasses mobile health technologies and interventions, is rapidly evolving in various medical specialties, and its impact is evident in oncology. In particular, mHealth has established itself as a prominent part of dermatology for cancer screening. Intensified research to seek its use and effectiveness in each phase of the skin cancer continuum is needed in this fast-growing field of teledermatology.<h4>Objective</h4>The purpose of this review was to describe ...[more]

PMID: 30072362

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo review and synthesise the evidence on informal carers' information needs in managing behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) of their care recipients and related mobile health (mHealth) applications to inform the design of an mHealth application.DesignThis is a systematic integrative review guided by Whittemore and Knafl's five-stages framework. Six databases were searched: Cochrane, CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, ProQuest and PsycINFO. The key concepts included 'dementia', 'behavioural and psychological symptoms', 'informal carers' and ('information need' or 'mHealth application'). Peer-reviewed full-text articles published in English from 2000 to 2022 were included. The methodological rigour of studies was analysed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool V.2018. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-2020 reporting guidelines were followed.ResultsThis review included 34 studies, including quantitative (n=13), qualitative (n=17) and mixed-method (n=4) studies. Four major themes emerged from the reported studies: the need for addressing information needs on managing BPSD, the role of support systems in managing BPSD, self-care for carers and the role of mHealth applications in providing education and support for carers. In managing BPSD, carers seek knowledge about dementia and BPSD, the roles of the carers and misconceptions about BPSD. One study reported an mHealth application to monitor the behavioural issues of people with dementia.ConclusionInformal carers of people with dementia face a number of challenges when providing care for BPSD of their care recipients. The lack of knowledge on managing BPSD is a significant challenge. Support systems such as professional, social, residential, legal and eHealth have a significant role in managing the BPSD of people with dementia in the community. mHealth interventions are sparse to support BPSD management. These findings can be used in designing an mHealth application that addresses needs related to managing BPSD of informal carers of people with dementia.Prospero registration numberCRD42021238540.

Project description:BackgroundNon-cognitive behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia affect up to 90% of people with dementia during the disease course and result in distress, increased carer burden, high service utilization and unwanted moves to care homes. Research has focused on long-term settings and has not considered people with dementia living at home and at different stages of the disease trajectory. Our aim is to review systematically the evidence concerning non-pharmacological strategies to minimise behavioural and psychological symptoms in community-dwelling older people with dementia.Methods/designOur approach is a two-stage co-design: a systematic mapping of the broad evidence around behavioural and psychological symptoms followed by an in-depth systematic review of studies of non-pharmacological interventions for behavioural and psychological symptoms from the perspective of their impact on community-dwelling older people with dementia and their carers. The review will include published literature involving a wide range of electronic databases using sensitive and comprehensive searches and lateral searching including checking citations.We will produce a descriptive map of the studies by design and by the focus of interventions and apply further inclusion criteria, developed in conjunction with lay experts, to select studies for an in-depth systematic review that will include independent quality assessment and detailed data extraction by two reviewers.The review process will be integrated with stakeholder meetings and a multidisciplinary expert advisory group to guide the review parameters and shape the research questions on the management of behavioural and psychological symptoms in people with dementia. Because studies are likely to be diverse in methodology and interventions, we will conduct a narrative synthesis of the in-depth systematic review. If appropriate, we will pool studies in a meta-analysis. We will explore review findings at both stages through focus groups and interviews with service providers, practitioners, people with dementia and carers.DiscussionThis integrated review in collaboration with key stakeholders will synthesise research evidence to identify appropriate interventions for effective management of behavioural and psychological symptoms that supports people with dementia living at home and their carers, and which reflects their priorities. It will make recommendations for research and practice.Study registrationPROSPERO registration number: CRD42013004344.

Project description:BackgroundIn 2019, a new coronavirus emerged in China, and the disease caused by the virus (COVID-19) was rapidly classified as a pandemic. Pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are considered to be at risk for severe COVID-19. In the context of the pandemic, there are serious concerns regarding adverse effects on maternal and neonatal outcomes for women with GDM. Effective treatments for patients with GDM are therefore particularly important. Due to contact restrictions and infection risks, digital approaches such as telemedicine are suitable alternatives.ObjectiveThis systematic review aims to summarize currently available evidence on maternal and offspring outcomes of pregnant women with GDM and COVID-19 and to examine telemedical interventions to improve maternal glycemic control during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsPublications were systematically identified by searching the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE via PubMed, Web of Science Core Collection, Embase, and CINAHL databases for studies published up to March 2021. We sorted the COVID-19 studies by outcome and divided the telemedical intervention studies into web-based and app-based groups. We analyzed case reports (COVID-19) and both randomized and nonrandomized controlled clinical trials (telemedicine). To determine the change in glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), we pooled appropriate studies and calculated the differences in means, with 95% CIs, for the intervention and control groups at the end of the interventions.ResultsRegarding COVID-19 studies, we identified 11 case reports, 3 letters, 1 case series, and 1 retrospective single-center study. In total, 41 patients with GDM and COVID-19 were analyzed. The maternal and neonatal outcomes were extremely heterogeneous. We identified adverse outcomes for mother and child through the interaction of GDM and COVID-19, such as cesarean deliveries and low Apgar scores. Furthermore, we selected 9 telemedicine-related articles: 6 were randomized controlled trials, 2 were clinical controlled trials, and 1 was a quasi-experimental design. In total, we analyzed 480 patients with GDM in the intervention groups and 494 in the control groups. Regarding the quality of the 9 telemedical studies, 4 were rated as strong, 4 as moderate, and 1 as weak. Telemedical interventions can contribute to favorable impacts on HbA1c and fasting blood glucose values in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Meta-analysis revealed a mean difference in HbA1c of -0.19% (95% CI 0.34% to 0.03%) for all telemedical interventions, -0.138% (95% CI -0.24% to -0.04%) for the web-based interventions, and -0.305% (96% CI -0.88% to 0.27%) for the app-based interventions.ConclusionsTelemedicine is an effective approach in the context of COVID-19 and GDM because it enables social distancing and represents optimal care of patients with GDM, especially with regard to glycemic control, which is very important in view of the identified adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Further research is needed.

Project description:BackgroundMobile health (mHealth) is often reputed to be cost-effective or cost-saving. Despite optimism, the strength of the evidence supporting this assertion has been limited. In this systematic review the body of evidence related to economic evaluations of mHealth interventions is assessed and summarized.MethodsSeven electronic bibliographic databases, grey literature, and relevant references were searched. Eligibility criteria included original articles, comparison of costs and consequences of interventions (one categorized as a primary mHealth intervention or mHealth intervention as a component of other interventions), health and economic outcomes and published in English. Full economic evaluations were appraised using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist and The PRISMA guidelines were followed.ResultsSearches identified 5902 results, of which 318 were examined at full text, and 39 were included in this review. The 39 studies spanned 19 countries, most of which were conducted in upper and upper-middle income countries (34, 87.2%). Primary mHealth interventions (35, 89.7%), behavior change communication type interventions (e.g., improve attendance rates, medication adherence) (27, 69.2%), and short messaging system (SMS) as the mHealth function (e.g., used to send reminders, information, provide support, conduct surveys or collect data) (22, 56.4%) were most frequent; the most frequent disease or condition focuses were outpatient clinic attendance, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes. The average percent of CHEERS checklist items reported was 79.6% (range 47.62-100, STD 14.18) and the top quartile reported 91.3-100%. In 29 studies (74.3%), researchers reported that the mHealth intervention was cost-effective, economically beneficial, or cost saving at base case.ConclusionsFindings highlight a growing body of economic evidence for mHealth interventions. Although all studies included a comparison of intervention effectiveness of a health-related outcome and reported economic data, many did not report all recommended economic outcome items and were lacking in comprehensive analysis. The identified economic evaluations varied by disease or condition focus, economic outcome measurements, perspectives, and were distributed unevenly geographically, limiting formal meta-analysis. Further research is needed in low and low-middle income countries and to understand the impact of different mHealth types. Following established economic reporting guidelines will improve this body of research.

Project description:Objective:To systematically review the publications on ecological momentary assessment (EMA) relating to physical activity (PA) behavior in order to classify the methodologies, and to identify the main mHealth technology-based tools and procedures that have been applied during the first 10 years since the emergence of smartphones. As a result of this review, we want to ask if there is enough evidence to propose the use of the term "mEMA" (mobile-based EMA). Design:A systematic review according to PRISMA Statement (PROSPERO registration: CRD42018088136). Method:Four databases (PsycINFO, CINALH, Medline and Web of Science Core Collection) were searched electronically from 2008 to February 2018. Results:A total of 76 studies from 297 potential articles on the use of EMA and PA were included in this review. It was found that 71% of studies specifically used "EMA" for assessing PA behaviors but the rest used other terminology that also adjusted to the inclusion criteria. Just over half (51.3%) of studies (39) used mHealth technology, mainly smartphones, for collecting EMA data. The majority (79.5%) of these studies (31 out of 39) were published during the last 4 years. On the other hand, 58.8% of studies that only used paper-and-pencil were published during the first 3 years of the 10-year period analyzed. An accelerometer was the main built-in sensor used for collecting PA behavior by means of mHealth (69%). Most of the studies were carried out on young-adult samples, with only three studies in older adults. Women were included in 60% of studies, and healthy people in 82%. The studies lasted between 1 and 7 days in 57.9%, and between three and seven assessments per day were carried out in 37%. The most popular topics evaluated together with PA were psychological state and social and environmental context. Conclusions:We have classified the EMA methodologies used for assessing PA behaviors. A total of 71% of studies used the term "EMA" and 51.3% used mHealth technology. Accelerometers have been the main built-in sensor used for collecting PA. The change of trend in the use of tools for EMA in PA coincides with the technological advances of the last decade due to the emergence of smartphones and mHealth technology. There is enough evidence to use the term mEMA when mHealth technology is being used for monitoring real-time lifestyle behaviors in natural situations. We define mEMA as the use of mobile computing and communication technologies for the EMA of health and lifestyle behaviors. It is clear that the use of mHealth is increasing, but there is still a lot to be gained from taking advantage of all the capabilities of this technology in order to apply EMA to PA behavior. Thus, mEMA methodology can help in the monitoring of healthy lifestyles under both subjective and objective perspectives. The tendency for future research should be the automatic recognition of the PA of the user without interrupting their behavior. The ecological information could be completed with voice messages, image captures or brief text selections on the touch screen made in real time, all managed through smartphone apps. This methodology could be extended when EMA combined with mHealth are used to evaluate other lifestyle behaviors.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Psychodrama is an experiential psychotherapy in which guided role-play is used to gain insights and work on personal and interpersonal problems and possible solutions. Despite the wealth of literature describing clinical work, psychodrama intervention research is relatively scarce compared to other psychotherapies and psychological interventions. OBJECTIVE:For this reason we implemented the integrative approach to systematic review that authorizes the combination of publications with diverse methodologies and all types of participants, interventions, comparisons, and outcomes. Our aim was to produce a comprehensive summary of psychodrama intervention research in the last decade that critically evaluates methodological issues to inform future studies. METHODS:We searched four major electronic databases (PsycINFO, PubMEd, Scopus by Elsevier, and Web of Science) for peer-reviewed articles on psychodrama interventions published in English between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2017. The quality of qualitative and mixed methods studies was assessed on the basis of pre-established guidelines, and the risk of bias was assessed for all quantitative randomized control studies, consistent with the PRISMA protocol. FINDINGS:The database search and a hand search resulted in 31 psychodrama intervention publications. Overall, these studies examined the effects of psychodrama on more than 20 different outcomes and most studies had adult clients. The next largest group was adolescents, whereas only two studies involved children. Thus psychodrama intervention research in the last decade suggests there are promising results in all methodologies, and highlights the need to enhance methodological as well as reporting quality and to theorize and examine modality-specific mechanisms that lead to therapeutic change. Recommendations to improve methodology, transparency, and specificity in reporting future psychodrama and other psychotherapy research are discussed.