Cargando…
Digital health for quality healthcare: A systematic mapping of review studies
OBJECTIVE: To systematically catalogue review studies on digital health to establish extent of evidence on quality healthcare and illuminate gaps for new understanding, perspectives and insights for evidence-informed policies and practices. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed database using s...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8943311/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35340904 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20552076221085810 |
_version_ | 1784673490262032384 |
---|---|
author | Ibrahim, Mohd Salami Mohamed Yusoff, Harmy Abu Bakar, Yasrul Izad Thwe Aung, Myat Moe Abas, Mohd Ihsanuddin Ramli, Ras Azira |
author_facet | Ibrahim, Mohd Salami Mohamed Yusoff, Harmy Abu Bakar, Yasrul Izad Thwe Aung, Myat Moe Abas, Mohd Ihsanuddin Ramli, Ras Azira |
author_sort | Ibrahim, Mohd Salami |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To systematically catalogue review studies on digital health to establish extent of evidence on quality healthcare and illuminate gaps for new understanding, perspectives and insights for evidence-informed policies and practices. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed database using sensitive search strings. Two reviewers independently conducted two-phase selection via title and abstract, followed by full-text appraisal. Consensuses were derived for any discrepancies. A standardized data extraction tool was used for reliable data mining. RESULTS: A total of 54 reviews from year 2014 to 2021 were included with notable increase in trend of publications. Systematic reviews constituted the majority (61.1%, (37.0% with meta-analyses)) followed by scoping reviews (38.9%). Domains of quality being reviewed include effectiveness (75.9%), accessibility (33.3%), patient safety (31.5%), efficiency (25.9%), patient-centred care (20.4%) and equity (16.7%). Mobile apps and computer-based were the commonest (79.6%) modalities. Strategies for effective intervention via digital health included engineering improved health behaviour (50.0%), better clinical assessment (35.1%), treatment compliance (33.3%) and enhanced coordination of care (24.1%). Psychiatry was the discipline with the most topics being reviewed for digital health (20.3%). CONCLUSION: Digital health reviews reported findings that were skewed towards improving the effectiveness of intervention via mHealth applications, and predominantly related to mental health and behavioural therapies. There were considerable gaps on review of evidence on digital health for cost efficiency, equitable healthcare and patient-centred care. Future empirical and review studies may investigate the association between fields of practice and tendency to adopt and research the use of digital health to improve care. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8943311 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89433112022-03-25 Digital health for quality healthcare: A systematic mapping of review studies Ibrahim, Mohd Salami Mohamed Yusoff, Harmy Abu Bakar, Yasrul Izad Thwe Aung, Myat Moe Abas, Mohd Ihsanuddin Ramli, Ras Azira Digit Health Review Article OBJECTIVE: To systematically catalogue review studies on digital health to establish extent of evidence on quality healthcare and illuminate gaps for new understanding, perspectives and insights for evidence-informed policies and practices. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed database using sensitive search strings. Two reviewers independently conducted two-phase selection via title and abstract, followed by full-text appraisal. Consensuses were derived for any discrepancies. A standardized data extraction tool was used for reliable data mining. RESULTS: A total of 54 reviews from year 2014 to 2021 were included with notable increase in trend of publications. Systematic reviews constituted the majority (61.1%, (37.0% with meta-analyses)) followed by scoping reviews (38.9%). Domains of quality being reviewed include effectiveness (75.9%), accessibility (33.3%), patient safety (31.5%), efficiency (25.9%), patient-centred care (20.4%) and equity (16.7%). Mobile apps and computer-based were the commonest (79.6%) modalities. Strategies for effective intervention via digital health included engineering improved health behaviour (50.0%), better clinical assessment (35.1%), treatment compliance (33.3%) and enhanced coordination of care (24.1%). Psychiatry was the discipline with the most topics being reviewed for digital health (20.3%). CONCLUSION: Digital health reviews reported findings that were skewed towards improving the effectiveness of intervention via mHealth applications, and predominantly related to mental health and behavioural therapies. There were considerable gaps on review of evidence on digital health for cost efficiency, equitable healthcare and patient-centred care. Future empirical and review studies may investigate the association between fields of practice and tendency to adopt and research the use of digital health to improve care. SAGE Publications 2022-03-18 /pmc/articles/PMC8943311/ /pubmed/35340904 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20552076221085810 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Review Article Ibrahim, Mohd Salami Mohamed Yusoff, Harmy Abu Bakar, Yasrul Izad Thwe Aung, Myat Moe Abas, Mohd Ihsanuddin Ramli, Ras Azira Digital health for quality healthcare: A systematic mapping of review studies |
title | Digital health for quality healthcare: A systematic mapping of review studies |
title_full | Digital health for quality healthcare: A systematic mapping of review studies |
title_fullStr | Digital health for quality healthcare: A systematic mapping of review studies |
title_full_unstemmed | Digital health for quality healthcare: A systematic mapping of review studies |
title_short | Digital health for quality healthcare: A systematic mapping of review studies |
title_sort | digital health for quality healthcare: a systematic mapping of review studies |
topic | Review Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8943311/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35340904 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20552076221085810 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ibrahimmohdsalami digitalhealthforqualityhealthcareasystematicmappingofreviewstudies AT mohamedyusoffharmy digitalhealthforqualityhealthcareasystematicmappingofreviewstudies AT abubakaryasrulizad digitalhealthforqualityhealthcareasystematicmappingofreviewstudies AT thweaungmyatmoe digitalhealthforqualityhealthcareasystematicmappingofreviewstudies AT abasmohdihsanuddin digitalhealthforqualityhealthcareasystematicmappingofreviewstudies AT ramlirasazira digitalhealthforqualityhealthcareasystematicmappingofreviewstudies |