Cargando…
Evaluating Patient-Centered Mobile Health Technologies: Definitions, Methodologies, and Outcomes
Several recently published studies and consensus statements have demonstrated that there is only modest (and in many cases, low-quality) evidence that mobile health (mHealth) can improve patient clinical outcomes such as the length of stay or reduction of readmissions. There is also uncertainty as t...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
JMIR Publications
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7688390/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33174846 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/17577 |
_version_ | 1783613701045092352 |
---|---|
author | Bruce, Courtenay Harrison, Patricia Giammattei, Charlie Desai, Shetal-Nicholas Sol, Joshua R Jones, Stephen Schwartz, Roberta |
author_facet | Bruce, Courtenay Harrison, Patricia Giammattei, Charlie Desai, Shetal-Nicholas Sol, Joshua R Jones, Stephen Schwartz, Roberta |
author_sort | Bruce, Courtenay |
collection | PubMed |
description | Several recently published studies and consensus statements have demonstrated that there is only modest (and in many cases, low-quality) evidence that mobile health (mHealth) can improve patient clinical outcomes such as the length of stay or reduction of readmissions. There is also uncertainty as to whether mHealth can improve patient-centered outcomes such as patient engagement or patient satisfaction. One principal challenge behind the “effectiveness” research in this field is a lack of common understanding about what it means to be effective in the digital space (ie, what should constitute a relevant outcome and how best to measure it). In this viewpoint, we call for interdisciplinary, conceptual clarity on the definitions, methodologies, and patient-centered outcomes frequently used in mHealth research. To formulate our recommendations, we used a snowballing approach to identify relevant definitions, outcomes, and methodologies related to mHealth. To begin, we drew heavily upon previously published detailed frameworks that enumerate definitions and measurements of engagement. We built upon these frameworks by extracting other relevant measures of patient-centered care, such as patient satisfaction, patient experience, and patient activation. We describe several definitional inconsistencies for key constructs in the mHealth literature. In an effort to achieve clarity, we tease apart several patient-centered care outcomes, and outline methodologies appropriate to measure each of these patient-care outcomes. By creating a common pathway linking definitions with outcomes and methodologies, we provide a possible interdisciplinary approach to evaluating mHealth technologies. With the broader goal of creating an interdisciplinary approach, we also provide several recommendations that we believe can advance mHealth research and implementation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7688390 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | JMIR Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-76883902020-11-27 Evaluating Patient-Centered Mobile Health Technologies: Definitions, Methodologies, and Outcomes Bruce, Courtenay Harrison, Patricia Giammattei, Charlie Desai, Shetal-Nicholas Sol, Joshua R Jones, Stephen Schwartz, Roberta JMIR Mhealth Uhealth Viewpoint Several recently published studies and consensus statements have demonstrated that there is only modest (and in many cases, low-quality) evidence that mobile health (mHealth) can improve patient clinical outcomes such as the length of stay or reduction of readmissions. There is also uncertainty as to whether mHealth can improve patient-centered outcomes such as patient engagement or patient satisfaction. One principal challenge behind the “effectiveness” research in this field is a lack of common understanding about what it means to be effective in the digital space (ie, what should constitute a relevant outcome and how best to measure it). In this viewpoint, we call for interdisciplinary, conceptual clarity on the definitions, methodologies, and patient-centered outcomes frequently used in mHealth research. To formulate our recommendations, we used a snowballing approach to identify relevant definitions, outcomes, and methodologies related to mHealth. To begin, we drew heavily upon previously published detailed frameworks that enumerate definitions and measurements of engagement. We built upon these frameworks by extracting other relevant measures of patient-centered care, such as patient satisfaction, patient experience, and patient activation. We describe several definitional inconsistencies for key constructs in the mHealth literature. In an effort to achieve clarity, we tease apart several patient-centered care outcomes, and outline methodologies appropriate to measure each of these patient-care outcomes. By creating a common pathway linking definitions with outcomes and methodologies, we provide a possible interdisciplinary approach to evaluating mHealth technologies. With the broader goal of creating an interdisciplinary approach, we also provide several recommendations that we believe can advance mHealth research and implementation. JMIR Publications 2020-11-11 /pmc/articles/PMC7688390/ /pubmed/33174846 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/17577 Text en ©Courtenay Bruce, Patricia Harrison, Charlie Giammattei, Shetal-Nicholas Desai, Joshua R Sol, Stephen Jones, Roberta Schwartz. Originally published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth (http://mhealth.jmir.org), 11.11.2020. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://mhealth.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included. |
spellingShingle | Viewpoint Bruce, Courtenay Harrison, Patricia Giammattei, Charlie Desai, Shetal-Nicholas Sol, Joshua R Jones, Stephen Schwartz, Roberta Evaluating Patient-Centered Mobile Health Technologies: Definitions, Methodologies, and Outcomes |
title | Evaluating Patient-Centered Mobile Health Technologies: Definitions, Methodologies, and Outcomes |
title_full | Evaluating Patient-Centered Mobile Health Technologies: Definitions, Methodologies, and Outcomes |
title_fullStr | Evaluating Patient-Centered Mobile Health Technologies: Definitions, Methodologies, and Outcomes |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating Patient-Centered Mobile Health Technologies: Definitions, Methodologies, and Outcomes |
title_short | Evaluating Patient-Centered Mobile Health Technologies: Definitions, Methodologies, and Outcomes |
title_sort | evaluating patient-centered mobile health technologies: definitions, methodologies, and outcomes |
topic | Viewpoint |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7688390/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33174846 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/17577 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT brucecourtenay evaluatingpatientcenteredmobilehealthtechnologiesdefinitionsmethodologiesandoutcomes AT harrisonpatricia evaluatingpatientcenteredmobilehealthtechnologiesdefinitionsmethodologiesandoutcomes AT giammatteicharlie evaluatingpatientcenteredmobilehealthtechnologiesdefinitionsmethodologiesandoutcomes AT desaishetalnicholas evaluatingpatientcenteredmobilehealthtechnologiesdefinitionsmethodologiesandoutcomes AT soljoshuar evaluatingpatientcenteredmobilehealthtechnologiesdefinitionsmethodologiesandoutcomes AT jonesstephen evaluatingpatientcenteredmobilehealthtechnologiesdefinitionsmethodologiesandoutcomes AT schwartzroberta evaluatingpatientcenteredmobilehealthtechnologiesdefinitionsmethodologiesandoutcomes |