Cargando…
Mobile app validation: a digital health scorecard approach
While digital health solutions continue to grow in number and in complexity, the ability for stakeholders in healthcare to easily discern quality lags far behind. This challenge is in part due to the lack of a transparent and standardized approach to validation. Evaluation of mobile health applicati...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8282811/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34267296 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41746-021-00476-7 |
_version_ | 1783723068907061248 |
---|---|
author | Sedhom, Ramy McShea, Michael J. Cohen, Adam B. Webster, Jonathan A. Mathews, Simon C. |
author_facet | Sedhom, Ramy McShea, Michael J. Cohen, Adam B. Webster, Jonathan A. Mathews, Simon C. |
author_sort | Sedhom, Ramy |
collection | PubMed |
description | While digital health solutions continue to grow in number and in complexity, the ability for stakeholders in healthcare to easily discern quality lags far behind. This challenge is in part due to the lack of a transparent and standardized approach to validation. Evaluation of mobile health applications (apps) is further burdened by low barriers to development and direct-to-user marketing, leading to a crowded and confusing landscape. In this context, we investigated the pragmatic application of a previously described framework for digital health validation, the Digital Health Scorecard, in a cohort of 22 popular mobile health oncology apps. The apps evaluated using this framework performed poorly, scoring 49.4% across all evaluation criteria as a group. Performance across component domains varied considerably with cost scoring highest at 100%, usability at 56.7%, technical at 37.3%, and clinical at 15.9%. satisfaction of prospectively determined end-user requirements derived from patient, family, and clinician consensus scored 37.2%. While cost outperformed consistently and usability was adequate, the results also suggested that apps suffered from significant technical limitations, were of limited clinical value, and generally did not do what end users wanted. These large gaps further support the need for transparent and standardized evaluation to help all stakeholders in healthcare improve the quality of mobile health. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8282811 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82828112021-07-23 Mobile app validation: a digital health scorecard approach Sedhom, Ramy McShea, Michael J. Cohen, Adam B. Webster, Jonathan A. Mathews, Simon C. NPJ Digit Med Article While digital health solutions continue to grow in number and in complexity, the ability for stakeholders in healthcare to easily discern quality lags far behind. This challenge is in part due to the lack of a transparent and standardized approach to validation. Evaluation of mobile health applications (apps) is further burdened by low barriers to development and direct-to-user marketing, leading to a crowded and confusing landscape. In this context, we investigated the pragmatic application of a previously described framework for digital health validation, the Digital Health Scorecard, in a cohort of 22 popular mobile health oncology apps. The apps evaluated using this framework performed poorly, scoring 49.4% across all evaluation criteria as a group. Performance across component domains varied considerably with cost scoring highest at 100%, usability at 56.7%, technical at 37.3%, and clinical at 15.9%. satisfaction of prospectively determined end-user requirements derived from patient, family, and clinician consensus scored 37.2%. While cost outperformed consistently and usability was adequate, the results also suggested that apps suffered from significant technical limitations, were of limited clinical value, and generally did not do what end users wanted. These large gaps further support the need for transparent and standardized evaluation to help all stakeholders in healthcare improve the quality of mobile health. Nature Publishing Group UK 2021-07-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8282811/ /pubmed/34267296 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41746-021-00476-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Sedhom, Ramy McShea, Michael J. Cohen, Adam B. Webster, Jonathan A. Mathews, Simon C. Mobile app validation: a digital health scorecard approach |
title | Mobile app validation: a digital health scorecard approach |
title_full | Mobile app validation: a digital health scorecard approach |
title_fullStr | Mobile app validation: a digital health scorecard approach |
title_full_unstemmed | Mobile app validation: a digital health scorecard approach |
title_short | Mobile app validation: a digital health scorecard approach |
title_sort | mobile app validation: a digital health scorecard approach |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8282811/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34267296 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41746-021-00476-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sedhomramy mobileappvalidationadigitalhealthscorecardapproach AT mcsheamichaelj mobileappvalidationadigitalhealthscorecardapproach AT cohenadamb mobileappvalidationadigitalhealthscorecardapproach AT websterjonathana mobileappvalidationadigitalhealthscorecardapproach AT mathewssimonc mobileappvalidationadigitalhealthscorecardapproach |