Dataset Information

Using digital interventions to improve the cardiometabolic health of populations: a meta-review of reporting quality.

ABSTRACT: Objectives:We conducted a meta-review to determine the reporting quality of user-centered digital interventions for the prevention and management of cardiometabolic conditions. Materials and Methods:Using predetermined inclusion criteria, systematic reviews published between 2010 and 2015 were identified from 3 databases. To assess whether current evidence is sufficient to inform wider uptake and implementation of digital health programs, we assessed the quality of reporting of research findings using (1) endorsement of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, (2) a quality assessment framework (eg, Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool), and (3) 8 parameters of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials of Electronic and Mobile HEalth Applications and onLine TeleHealth (CONSORT-eHEALTH) guidelines (developed in 2010). Results:Of the 33 systematic reviews covering social media, Web-based programs, mobile health programs, and composite modalities, 6 reported using the recommended PRISMA guidelines. Seven did not report using a quality assessment framework. Applying the CONSORT-EHEALTH guidelines, reporting was of mild to moderate strength. Discussion:To our knowledge, this is the first meta-review to provide a comprehensive analysis of the quality of reporting of research findings for a range of digital health interventions. Our findings suggest that the evidence base and quality of reporting in this rapidly developing field needs significant improvement in order to inform wider implementation and uptake. Conclusion:The inconsistent quality of reporting of digital health interventions for cardiometabolic outcomes may be a critical impediment to real-world implementation.

SUBMITTER: O'Neil A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7651900 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Using digital interventions to improve the cardiometabolic health of populations: a meta-review of reporting quality.

O'Neil Adrienne A Cocker Fiona F Rarau Patricia P Baptista Shaira S Cassimatis Mandy M Barr Taylor C C Lau Annie Y S AYS Kanuri Nitya N Oldenburg Brian B

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA 20170701 4

<h4>Objectives</h4>We conducted a meta-review to determine the reporting quality of user-centered digital interventions for the prevention and management of cardiometabolic conditions.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>Using predetermined inclusion criteria, systematic reviews published between 2010 and 2015 were identified from 3 databases. To assess whether current evidence is sufficient to inform wider uptake and implementation of digital health programs, we assessed the quality of reporting of re ...[more]

PMID: 28339628

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDigital health interventions have become increasingly common across health care, both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Health inequalities, particularly with respect to ethnicity, may not be considered in frameworks that address the implementation of digital health interventions. We considered frameworks to include any models, theories, or taxonomies that describe or predict implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions.ObjectiveWe aimed to assess how health inequalities are addressed in frameworks relevant to the implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions; health and ethnic inequalities; and interventions for cardiometabolic disease.MethodsSCOPUS, PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and gray literature were searched to identify papers on frameworks relevant to the implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions; ethnically or culturally diverse populations and health inequalities; and interventions for cardiometabolic disease. We assessed the extent to which frameworks address health inequalities, specifically ethnic inequalities; explored how they were addressed; and developed recommendations for good practice.ResultsOf 58 relevant papers, 22 (38%) included frameworks that referred to health inequalities. Inequalities were conceptualized as society-level, system-level, intervention-level, and individual. Only 5 frameworks considered all levels. Three frameworks considered how digital health interventions might interact with or exacerbate existing health inequalities, and 3 considered the process of health technology implementation, uptake, and use and suggested opportunities to improve equity in digital health. When ethnicity was considered, it was often within the broader concepts of social determinants of health. Only 3 frameworks explicitly addressed ethnicity: one focused on culturally tailoring digital health interventions, and 2 were applied to management of cardiometabolic disease.ConclusionsExisting frameworks evaluate implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions, but to consider factors related to ethnicity, it is necessary to look across frameworks. We have developed a visual guide of the key constructs across the 4 potential levels of action for digital health inequalities, which can be used to support future research and inform digital health policies.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:There is evidence that the use of some reporting guidelines, such as the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials, is associated with improved completeness of reporting in health research. However, the current levels of adherence to reporting guidelines are suboptimal. Over the last few years, several actions aiming to improve compliance with reporting guidelines have been taken and proposed. We will conduct a scoping review of interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research that have been evaluated or suggested, in order to inform future interventions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:Our review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review methods manual. We will search for relevant studies in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases. Moreover, we will carry out lateral searches from the reference lists of the included studies, as well as from the lists of articles citing the included ones. One reviewer will screen the full list, which will be randomly split into two halves and independently screened by the other two reviewers. Two reviewers will perform data extraction independently. Discrepancies will be solved through discussion. In addition, this search strategy will be supplemented by a grey literature search. The interventions found will be classified as assessed or suggested, as well as according to different criteria, in relation to their target (journal policies, journal editors, authors, reviewers, funders, ethical boards or others) or the research stage at which they are performed (design, conducting, reporting or peer review). Descriptive statistical analysis will be performed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:A paper summarising the findings from this review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. This scoping review will contribute to a better understanding and a broader perspective on how the problem of adhering better to reporting guidelines has been tackled so far. This could be a major first step towards developing future strategies to improve compliance with reporting guidelines in health research.

Project description:Background: Refugees, asylum seekers, and internally displaced people experience a high burden of mental health problems owing to their experiencing traumas and stressful events.Objective: To summarise the available evidence and analyse the efficacy of brief psychological interventions (< 3 months) on improving mental health outcomes, including depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)-related symptoms in refugees.Method: We searched Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Global Index Medicus from inception to 19 December 2023. We included controlled studies using any cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) or CBT-based therapies delivered over a short time (< 3 months), which reported mental health outcomes pre-and post-intervention. We conducted meta-analyses using random effects to derive pooled summary statistics. The quality of the evidence was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB2) and ROBINS-I tools. This study is registered on the Open Science Framework, DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/9CXU4.Results: 34 eligible studies across 37 publications were retrieved for analysis, and 33 studies with 4479 participants were included in the meta-analysis. There was an overall improvement in immediate mental health outcomes for all three domains, with analysis of 13 studies on anxiety outcomes (SMD -1.12, 95% CI -1.72 to -0.52), 20 studies on depression (SMD -1.04, 95% CI -1.97 to -0.11), and 24 studies on PTSD (SMD -0.82, 95% CI -1.20 to -0.45). At 3 to 6-month follow-up, however, analysis of mental health outcomes shows no significant change from baseline, with a SMD of 0.24 (95% CI -0.94 to 1.42) across 4 studies, -0.73 (95% CI -2.14 to 0.68) across 9 studies, and 0.29 (95% CI -0.94 to 1.53) across 12 studies for anxiety, depression, and PTSD respectively.Conclusion: Low-quality evidence shows brief psychological interventions have a positive immediate effect on refugees and internally displaced people's mental well-being. However, these effects do not persist in the short-term follow up. Heterogeneity was high, even among subgroups, impacting our findings' generalisability.

Dataset Information

Using digital interventions to improve the cardiometabolic health of populations: a meta-review of reporting quality.

Publications

Using digital interventions to improve the cardiometabolic health of populations: a meta-review of reporting quality.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets