Cargando…

Use of geofencing interventions in population health research: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES: Technological advancements that use global positioning system (GPS), such as geofencing, provide the opportunity to examine place-based context in population health research. This review aimed to systematically identify, assess and synthesise the existing evidence on geofencing intervent...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tobin, Karin, Heidari, Omeid, Volpi, Connor, Sodder, Shereen, Duncan, Dustin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10401224/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37536963
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069374
_version_ 1785084611041165312
author Tobin, Karin
Heidari, Omeid
Volpi, Connor
Sodder, Shereen
Duncan, Dustin
author_facet Tobin, Karin
Heidari, Omeid
Volpi, Connor
Sodder, Shereen
Duncan, Dustin
author_sort Tobin, Karin
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Technological advancements that use global positioning system (GPS), such as geofencing, provide the opportunity to examine place-based context in population health research. This review aimed to systematically identify, assess and synthesise the existing evidence on geofencing intervention design, acceptability, feasibility and/or impact. DESIGN: Scoping review, using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidance for reporting. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane and PsycINFO for articles in English published up to 31 December 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Articles were included if geofencing was used as a mechanism for intervention delivery. Exclusion criteria: (1) a component or combination of GPS, geographical information system or ecological momentary assessment was used without delivery of an intervention; (2) did not include a health or health-related outcome from the geofencing intervention; or (3) was not a peer-reviewed study. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Several researchers independently reviewed all abstracts and full-text articles for final inclusion. RESULTS: A total of 2171 articles were found; after exclusions, nine studies were included in the review. The majority were published in 5 years preceding the search (89%). Geofences in most studies (n=5) were fixed and programmed in the mobile application carried by participants without their input. Mechanisms of geofencing interventions were classified as direct or indirect, with five studies (56%) using direct interventions. There were several different health outcomes (from smoking to problematic alcohol use) across the five studies that used a direct geofencing intervention. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review found geofencing to be an emerging technology that is an acceptable and feasible intervention applied to several different populations and health outcomes. Future studies should specify the rationale for the locations that are geofenced and user input. Moreover, attention to mechanisms of actions will enable scientists to understand not only whether geofencing is an appropriate and effective intervention but why it works to achieve the outcomes observed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10401224
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104012242023-08-05 Use of geofencing interventions in population health research: a scoping review Tobin, Karin Heidari, Omeid Volpi, Connor Sodder, Shereen Duncan, Dustin BMJ Open Public Health OBJECTIVES: Technological advancements that use global positioning system (GPS), such as geofencing, provide the opportunity to examine place-based context in population health research. This review aimed to systematically identify, assess and synthesise the existing evidence on geofencing intervention design, acceptability, feasibility and/or impact. DESIGN: Scoping review, using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidance for reporting. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane and PsycINFO for articles in English published up to 31 December 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Articles were included if geofencing was used as a mechanism for intervention delivery. Exclusion criteria: (1) a component or combination of GPS, geographical information system or ecological momentary assessment was used without delivery of an intervention; (2) did not include a health or health-related outcome from the geofencing intervention; or (3) was not a peer-reviewed study. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Several researchers independently reviewed all abstracts and full-text articles for final inclusion. RESULTS: A total of 2171 articles were found; after exclusions, nine studies were included in the review. The majority were published in 5 years preceding the search (89%). Geofences in most studies (n=5) were fixed and programmed in the mobile application carried by participants without their input. Mechanisms of geofencing interventions were classified as direct or indirect, with five studies (56%) using direct interventions. There were several different health outcomes (from smoking to problematic alcohol use) across the five studies that used a direct geofencing intervention. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review found geofencing to be an emerging technology that is an acceptable and feasible intervention applied to several different populations and health outcomes. Future studies should specify the rationale for the locations that are geofenced and user input. Moreover, attention to mechanisms of actions will enable scientists to understand not only whether geofencing is an appropriate and effective intervention but why it works to achieve the outcomes observed. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-08-03 /pmc/articles/PMC10401224/ /pubmed/37536963 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069374 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Public Health
Tobin, Karin
Heidari, Omeid
Volpi, Connor
Sodder, Shereen
Duncan, Dustin
Use of geofencing interventions in population health research: a scoping review
title Use of geofencing interventions in population health research: a scoping review
title_full Use of geofencing interventions in population health research: a scoping review
title_fullStr Use of geofencing interventions in population health research: a scoping review
title_full_unstemmed Use of geofencing interventions in population health research: a scoping review
title_short Use of geofencing interventions in population health research: a scoping review
title_sort use of geofencing interventions in population health research: a scoping review
topic Public Health
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10401224/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37536963
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069374
work_keys_str_mv AT tobinkarin useofgeofencinginterventionsinpopulationhealthresearchascopingreview
AT heidariomeid useofgeofencinginterventionsinpopulationhealthresearchascopingreview
AT volpiconnor useofgeofencinginterventionsinpopulationhealthresearchascopingreview
AT soddershereen useofgeofencinginterventionsinpopulationhealthresearchascopingreview
AT duncandustin useofgeofencinginterventionsinpopulationhealthresearchascopingreview