Can mobile health apps replace GPs? A scoping review of comparisons between mobile apps and GP tasks.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Mobile health applications (mHealth apps) are increasingly being used to perform tasks that are conventionally performed by general practitioners (GPs), such as those involved in promoting health, preventing disease, diagnosis, treatment, monitoring, and support for health services. This raises an important question: can mobile apps replace GPs? This study aimed to systematically search for and identify mobile apps that can perform GP tasks.Methods
A scoping review was carried out. The Google Play Store and Apple App Store were searched for mobile apps, using search terms derived from the UK Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) guideline on GPs' core capabilities and competencies. A manual search was also performed to identify additional apps.Results
The final analysis included 17 apps from the Google Play Store and Apple App Store, and 21 apps identified by the manual search. mHealth apps were found to have the potential to replace GPs for tasks such as recording medical history and making diagnoses; performing some physical examinations; supporting clinical decision making and management; assisting in urgent, long-term, and disease-specific care; and health promotion. In contrast, mHealth apps were unable to perform medical procedures, appropriately utilise other professionals, and coordinate a team-based approach.Conclusions
This scoping review highlights the functions of mHealth apps that can potentially replace GP tasks. Future research should focus on assessing the performance and quality of mHealth apps in comparison with that of real doctors.
SUBMITTER: Wattanapisit A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6945711 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Can mobile health apps replace GPs? A scoping review of comparisons between mobile apps and GP tasks.
Wattanapisit Apichai A Teo Chin Hai CH Wattanapisit Sanhapan S Teoh Emylia E Woo Wing Jun WJ Ng Chirk Jenn CJ
BMC medical informatics and decision making 20200106 1
<h4>Background</h4>Mobile health applications (mHealth apps) are increasingly being used to perform tasks that are conventionally performed by general practitioners (GPs), such as those involved in promoting health, preventing disease, diagnosis, treatment, monitoring, and support for health services. This raises an important question: can mobile apps replace GPs? This study aimed to systematically search for and identify mobile apps that can perform GP tasks.<h4>Methods</h4>A scoping review was ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundPrivacy has always been a concern, especially in the health domain. The proliferation of mobile health (mHealth) apps has led to a large amount of sensitive data being generated. Some authors have performed privacy assessments of mHealth apps. They have evaluated diverse privacy components; however, different authors have used different criteria for their assessments.ObjectiveThis scoping review aims to understand how privacy is assessed for mHealth apps, focusing on the components, scales, criteria, and scoring methods used. A simple taxonomy to categorize the privacy assessments of mHealth apps based on component evaluation is also proposed.MethodsWe followed the methodology defined by Arksey and O'Malley to conduct a scoping review. Included studies were categorized based on the privacy component, which was assessed using the proposed taxonomy.ResultsThe database searches retrieved a total of 710 citations-24 of them met the defined selection criteria, and data were extracted from them. Even though the inclusion criteria considered articles published since 2009, all the studies that were ultimately included were published from 2014 onward. Although 12 papers out of 24 (50%) analyzed only privacy, 8 (33%) analyzed both privacy and security. Moreover, 4 papers (17%) analyzed full apps, with privacy being just part of the assessment. The evaluation criteria used by authors were heterogeneous and were based on their experience, the literature, and/or existing legal frameworks. Regarding the set of items used for the assessments, each article defined a different one. Items included app permissions, analysis of the destination, analysis of the content of communications, study of the privacy policy, use of remote storage, and existence of a password to access the app, among many others. Most of the included studies provided a scoring method that enables the comparison of privacy among apps.ConclusionsThe privacy assessment of mHealth apps is a complex task, as the criteria used by different authors for their evaluations are very heterogeneous. Although some studies about privacy assessment have been conducted, a very large set of items to evaluate privacy has been used up until now. In-app information and privacy policies are primarily utilized by the scientific community to extract privacy information from mHealth apps. The creation of a scale based on more objective criteria is a desirable step forward for privacy assessment in the future.
| S-EPMC7367524 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Mental health conditions can have significant negative impacts on wellbeing and healthcare systems. Despite their high prevalence worldwide, there is still insufficient recognition and accessible treatments. Many mobile apps are available to the general population that aim to support mental health needs; however, there is limited evidence of their effectiveness. Mobile apps for mental health are beginning to incorporate artificial intelligence and there is a need for an overview of the state of the literature on these apps. The purpose of this scoping review is to provide an overview of the current research landscape and knowledge gaps regarding the use of artificial intelligence in mobile health apps for mental health. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) and Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, and Study types (PICOS) frameworks were used to structure the review and the search. PubMed was systematically searched for randomised controlled trials and cohort studies published in English since 2014 that evaluate artificial intelligence- or machine learning-enabled mobile apps for mental health support. Two reviewers collaboratively screened references (MMI and EM), selected studies for inclusion based on the eligibility criteria and extracted the data (MMI and CL), which were synthesised in a descriptive analysis. 1,022 studies were identified in the initial search and 4 were included in the final review. The mobile apps investigated incorporated different artificial intelligence and machine learning techniques for a variety of purposes (risk prediction, classification, and personalisation) and aimed to address a wide range of mental health needs (depression, stress, and suicide risk). The studies' characteristics also varied in terms of methods, sample size, and study duration. Overall, the studies demonstrated the feasibility of using artificial intelligence to support mental health apps, but the early stages of the research and weaknesses in the study designs highlight the need for more research into artificial intelligence- and machine learning-enabled mental health apps and stronger evidence of their effectiveness. This research is essential and urgent, considering the easy availability of these apps to a large population.
| S-EPMC9931284 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 rapidly spread around the world, causing the disease COVID-19. To contain the virus, much hope is placed on participatory surveillance using mobile apps, such as automated digital contact tracing, but broad adoption is an important prerequisite for associated interventions to be effective. Data protection aspects are a critical factor for adoption, and privacy risks of solutions developed often need to be balanced against their functionalities. This is reflected by an intensive discussion in the public and the scientific community about privacy-preserving approaches.ObjectiveOur aim is to inform the current discussions and to support the development of solutions providing an optimal balance between privacy protection and pandemic control. To this end, we present a systematic analysis of existing literature on citizen-centered surveillance solutions collecting individual-level spatial data. Our main hypothesis is that there are dependencies between the following dimensions: the use cases supported, the technology used to collect spatial data, the specific diseases focused on, and data protection measures implemented.MethodsWe searched PubMed and IEEE Xplore with a search string combining terms from the area of infectious disease management with terms describing spatial surveillance technologies to identify studies published between 2010 and 2020. After a two-step eligibility assessment process, 27 articles were selected for the final analysis. We collected data on the four dimensions described as well as metadata, which we then analyzed by calculating univariate and bivariate frequency distributions.ResultsWe identified four different use cases, which focused on individual surveillance and public health (most common: digital contact tracing). We found that the solutions described were highly specialized, with 89% (24/27) of the articles covering one use case only. Moreover, we identified eight different technologies used for collecting spatial data (most common: GPS receivers) and five different diseases covered (most common: COVID-19). Finally, we also identified six different data protection measures (most common: pseudonymization). As hypothesized, we identified relationships between the dimensions. We found that for highly infectious diseases such as COVID-19 the most common use case was contact tracing, typically based on Bluetooth technology. For managing vector-borne diseases, use cases require absolute positions, which are typically measured using GPS. Absolute spatial locations are also important for further use cases relevant to the management of other infectious diseases.ConclusionsWe see a large potential for future solutions supporting multiple use cases by combining different technologies (eg, Bluetooth and GPS). For this to be successful, however, adequate privacy-protection measures must be implemented. Technologies currently used in this context can probably not offer enough protection. We, therefore, recommend that future solutions should consider the use of modern privacy-enhancing techniques (eg, from the area of secure multiparty computing and differential privacy).
| S-EPMC7674146 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe study sought to review the different assessment items that have been used within existing health app evaluation frameworks aimed at individual, clinician, or organizational users, and to analyze the scoring and evaluation methods used in these frameworks.Materials and methodsWe searched multiple bibliographic databases and conducted backward searches of reference lists, using search terms that were synonyms of "health apps," "evaluation," and "frameworks." The review covered publications from 2011 to April 2020. Studies on health app evaluation frameworks and studies that elaborated on the scaling and scoring mechanisms applied in such frameworks were included.ResultsTen common domains were identified across general health app evaluation frameworks. A list of 430 assessment criteria was compiled across 97 identified studies. The most frequently used scaling mechanism was a 5-point Likert scale. Most studies have adopted summary statistics to generate the total scoring of each app, and the most popular approach taken was the calculation of mean or average scores. Other frameworks did not use any scaling or scoring mechanism and adopted criteria-based, pictorial, or descriptive approaches, or "threshold" filter.DiscussionThere is wide variance in the approaches to evaluating health apps within published frameworks, and this variance leads to ongoing uncertainty in how to evaluate health apps.ConclusionsA new evaluation framework is needed that can integrate the full range of evaluative criteria within one structure, and provide summative guidance on health app rating, to support individual app users, clinicians, and health organizations in choosing or recommending the best health app.
| S-EPMC8263081 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEmerging health care strategies addressing medication adherence include the use of direct-to-patient incentives or elements adapted from computer games. However, there is currently no published evidence synthesis on the use of gamification or financial incentives in mobile apps to improve medication adherence.ObjectiveThe aim of this scoping review is to synthesize and appraise the literature pertaining to the use of mobile apps containing gamification or financial incentives for medication adherence. There were two objectives: to explore the reported effectiveness of these features and to describe and appraise the design and development process, including patient involvement.MethodsThe following databases were searched for relevant articles published in English from database inception to September 24, 2020: Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science. The framework by Arksey and O'Malley and the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist guided this scoping review. Using a systematic screening process, studies were included if incentives or game features were used within mobile apps to specifically address medication adherence. An appraisal using risk of bias tools was also applied to their respective study design.ResultsA total of 11 studies from the initial 691 retrieved articles were included in this review. Across the studies, gamification alone (9/11, 82%) was used more than financial incentives (1/11, 9%) alone or a combination of the two (1/11, 9%). The studies generally reported improved or sustained optimal medication adherence outcomes; however, there was significant heterogeneity in the patient population, methodology such as outcome measures, and reporting of these studies. There was considerable variability in the development process and evaluation of the apps, with authors opting for either the waterfall or agile methodology. App development was often guided by a theory, but across the reviewed studies, there were no common theories used. Patient involvement was not commonly evident in predevelopment phases but were generally reserved for evaluations of feasibility, acceptance, and effectiveness. Patient perspectives on gamified app features indicated a potential to motivate positive health behaviors such as medication adherence along with critical themes of repetitiveness and irrelevance of certain features. The appraisal indicated a low risk of bias in most studies, although concerns were identified in potential confounding.ConclusionsTo effectively address medication adherence via gamified and incentivized mobile apps, an evidence-based co-design approach and agile methodology should be used. This review indicates some adoption of an agile approach in app development; however, patient involvement is lacking in earlier stages. Further research in a generalized cohort of patients living with chronic conditions would facilitate the identification of barriers, potential opportunities, and the justification for the use of gamification and financial incentives in mobile apps for medication adherence.
| S-EPMC8902658 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMobile devices can provide extendable learning environments in higher education and motivate students to engage in adaptive and collaborative learning. Developers must design mobile apps that are practical, effective, and easy to use, and usability testing is essential for understanding how mobile apps meet users' needs. No previous reviews have investigated the usability of mobile apps developed for health care education.ObjectiveThe aim of this scoping review is to identify usability methods and attributes in usability studies of mobile apps for health care education.MethodsA comprehensive search was carried out in 10 databases, reference lists, and gray literature. Studies were included if they dealt with health care students and usability of mobile apps for learning. Frequencies and percentages were used to present the nominal data, together with tables and graphical illustrations. Examples include a figure of the study selection process, an illustration of the frequency of inquiry usability evaluation and data collection methods, and an overview of the distribution of the identified usability attributes. We followed the Arksey and O'Malley framework for scoping reviews.ResultsOur scoping review collated 88 articles involving 98 studies, mainly related to medical and nursing students. The studies were conducted from 22 countries and were published between 2008 and 2021. Field testing was the main usability experiment used, and the usability evaluation methods were either inquiry-based or based on user testing. Inquiry methods were predominantly used: 1-group design (46/98, 47%), control group design (12/98, 12%), randomized controlled trials (12/98, 12%), mixed methods (12/98, 12%), and qualitative methods (11/98, 11%). User testing methods applied were all think aloud (5/98, 5%). A total of 17 usability attributes were identified; of these, satisfaction, usefulness, ease of use, learning performance, and learnability were reported most frequently. The most frequently used data collection method was questionnaires (83/98, 85%), but only 19% (19/98) of studies used a psychometrically tested usability questionnaire. Other data collection methods included focus group interviews, knowledge and task performance testing, and user data collected from apps, interviews, written qualitative reflections, and observations. Most of the included studies used more than one data collection method.ConclusionsExperimental designs were the most commonly used methods for evaluating usability, and most studies used field testing. Questionnaires were frequently used for data collection, although few studies used psychometrically tested questionnaires. The usability attributes identified most often were satisfaction, usefulness, and ease of use. The results indicate that combining different usability evaluation methods, incorporating both subjective and objective usability measures, and specifying which usability attributes to test seem advantageous. The results can support the planning and conduct of future usability studies for the advancement of mobile learning apps in health care education.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.2196/19072.
| S-EPMC9280458 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Large numbers of children and adolescents in Canada, UK and USA are not getting their recommended daily dose of moderate to vigorous physical activity, and are thus more prone to obesity and its ill health effects. Exergames (video games that require physical activity to play) are rapidly gaining user acceptance, and may have the potential to increase physical activity levels among young people. Mobile exergames for GPS (global positioning system)-enabled smartphones and mini-tablets take players outdoors, in the open air, unlike console exergames, e.g., Xbox 360 Kinect exergames, which limit players to playing indoors in front of a TV set. In this paper and its companion 'Additional file 1', we review different examples of GPS exergames and of gamified geosocial apps and gadgets (mobile, location-aware apps and devices with social and gamification features), and briefly discuss some of the issues surrounding their use. Further research is needed to document best practices in this area, quantify the exact health and fitness benefits of GPS exergames and apps (under different settings and scenarios), and find out what is needed to improve them and the best ways to promote their adoption by the public.
| S-EPMC3657542 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMindful eating is an emerging area of research for managing unhealthy eating and weight-related behaviors such as binge eating and emotional eating. Although there are numerous commercial mindful eating apps available, their quality, effectiveness, and whether they are accurately based on mindfulness-based eating awareness are unknown.ObjectiveThis review aimed to appraise the quality of the mindful eating apps and to appraise the quality of content on mindful eating apps.MethodsA review of mindful eating apps available on Apple iTunes was undertaken from March to April 2018. Relevant apps meeting the inclusion criteria were subjectively appraised for general app quality using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) guidelines and for the quality of content on mindful eating. A total of 22 apps met the inclusion criteria and were appraised.ResultsMany of the reviewed apps were assessed as functional and had moderate scores in aesthetics based on the criteria in the MARS assessment. However, some received lower scores in the domains of information and engagement. The majority of the apps did not teach users how to eat mindfully using all five senses. Hence, they were scored as incomplete in accurately providing mindfulness-based eating awareness. Instead, most apps were either eating timers, hunger rating apps, or diaries. Areas of potential improvement were in comprehensiveness and diversity of media, in the quantity and quality of information, and in the inclusion of privacy and security policies. To truly teach mindful eating, the apps need to provide guided examples involving the five senses beyond simply timing eating or writing in a diary. They also need to include eating meditations to assist people with their disordered eating such as binge eating, fullness, satiety, and craving meditations that may help them with coping when experiencing difficulties. They should also have engaging and entertaining features delivered through diverse media to ensure sustained use and interest by consumers.ConclusionsFuture mindful eating apps could be improved by accurate adherence to mindful eating. Further improvement could be achieved by ameliorating the domains of information, engagement, and aesthetics and having adequate privacy policies.
| S-EPMC6727629 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMobile health applications (mHealth apps) have been widely used for various purposes for mitigating the COVID-19 pandemic, such as self-assessment, contact tracing, disseminating information, minimizing exposure, and reducing face-to-face health consultation. The objective of this study is to systematically review COVID-19 related mHealth apps and highlight gaps to inform the development of future mHealth initiatives in Indonesia.MethodsA systematic search strategy using a PRISMA flowchart was used to identify mHealth apps available in Google Play and Apple Play stores. We searched mHealth apps using certain specific terms related to COVID-19 outbreaks. The inclusion criteria were apps-based smartphone users related to COVID-19 using local language, free of cost, available in the Google Play and Apple Play Stores, and supported by the Indonesian government. We excluded games, apps on infectious diseases unrelated to COVID-19 specifically, and apps with non-Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian language). The selected mHealth apps were assessed based on two measures: (1) the WHO guidelines on digital health intervention and (2) the four dimensions of the mHealth technology fit framework. In addition, user feedback from experienced and non-experienced users was conducted to evaluate four dimensions of the apps.ResultsA total of 339 mHealth apps were generated from the initial search, remaining seven selected apps that met inclusion criteria. The results highlighted that mHealth apps reviewed had still not been widely used by the general public. The applications were purposed to disseminate information, conduct a self-risk assessment, provide an online community forum, and telemedicine or teleconsultation regarding COVID-19. Data services, including data storage, aggregation, and data exchange, are available in most apps. The rarest function found was contact tracing and assisting health management and health workers, such as the availability of testing facilities, reporting test results, and prescribing medication. The main issues reported were the lack of data security and data privacy protection, integration and infrastructures, usability, and usefulness.ConclusionOur study highlighted the necessity to improve mHealth apps' functions related to assisting health workers and the function of digital contact tracing. An effort to increase public awareness regarding the use of mHealth is also necessary to streamline the function of this innovation. Policymakers must consider usefulness, usability, integration, and infrastructure issues to improve their mHealth function.
| S-EPMC9114306 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe importance of mobile health (mHealth) apps is growing. Independent of the technologies used, mHealth apps bring more functionality into the hands of users. In the health context, mHealth apps play an important role in providing information and services to patients, offering health care professionals ways to monitor vital parameters or consult patients remotely. The importance of confidentiality in health care and the opaqueness of transport security in apps make the latter an important research subject.ObjectiveThis study aimed to (1) identify relevant security concerns on the server side of mHealth apps, (2) test a subset of mHealth apps regarding their vulnerability to those concerns, and (3) compare the servers used by mHealth apps with servers used in all domains.MethodsServer security characteristics relevant to the security of mHealth apps were assessed, presented, and discussed. To evaluate servers, appropriate tools were selected. Apps from the Android and iOS app stores were selected and tested, and the results for functional and other backend servers were evaluated.ResultsThe 60 apps tested communicate with 823 servers. Of these, 291 were categorized as functional backend servers, and 44 (44/291, 15.1%) of these received a rating below the A range (A+, A, and A-) by Qualys SSL Labs. A chi-square test was conducted against the number of servers receiving such ratings from SSL Pulse by Qualys SSL Labs. It was found that the tested servers from mHealth apps received significantly fewer ratings below the A range (P<.001). The internationally available apps from the test set performed significantly better than those only available in the German stores (alpha=.05; P=.03). Of the 60 apps, 28 (28/60, 47%) were found using at least one functional backend server that received a rating below the A range from Qualys SSL Labs, endangering confidentiality, authenticity, and integrity of the data displayed. The number of apps that used at least one entirely unsecured connection was 20 (20/60, 33%) when communicating with functional backend servers. It was also found that a majority of apps used advertising, tracking, or external content provider servers. When looking at all nonfunctional backend servers, 48 (48/60, 80%) apps used at least one server that received a rating below the A range.ConclusionsThe results show that although servers in the mHealth domain perform significantly better regarding their security, there are still problems with the configuration of some. The most severe problems observed can expose patient communication with health care professionals, be exploited to display false or harmful information, or used to send data to an app facilitating further damage on the device. Following the recommendations for mHealth app developers, the most regularly observed security issues can be avoided or mitigated.
| S-EPMC6364205 | biostudies-literature