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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sedhom, Ramy, McShea, Michael J., Cohen, Adam B., Webster, Jonathan A., Mathews, Simon C.
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