Mobile app validation: a digital health scorecard approach

Abstract 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...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Ramy Sedhom, Michael J. McShea, Adam B. Cohen, Jonathan A. Webster, Simon C. Mathews
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Nature Portfolio 2021
Materias:	Computer applications to medicine. Medical informatics R858-859.7
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/b4dcaf0179ca44d8819badc810977a47
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:b4dcaf0179ca44d8819badc810977a47
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:b4dcaf0179ca44d8819badc810977a472021-12-02T16:09:40ZMobile app validation: a digital health scorecard approach10.1038/s41746-021-00476-72398-6352https://doaj.org/article/b4dcaf0179ca44d8819badc810977a472021-07-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-021-00476-7https://doaj.org/toc/2398-6352Abstract 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.Ramy SedhomMichael J. McSheaAdam B. CohenJonathan A. WebsterSimon C. MathewsNature PortfolioarticleComputer applications to medicine. Medical informaticsR858-859.7ENnpj Digital Medicine, Vol 4, Iss 1, Pp 1-8 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Computer applications to medicine. Medical informatics R858-859.7
spellingShingle	Computer applications to medicine. Medical informatics R858-859.7 Ramy Sedhom Michael J. McShea Adam B. Cohen Jonathan A. Webster Simon C. Mathews Mobile app validation: a digital health scorecard approach
description	Abstract 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	article
author	Ramy Sedhom Michael J. McShea Adam B. Cohen Jonathan A. Webster Simon C. Mathews
author_facet	Ramy Sedhom Michael J. McShea Adam B. Cohen Jonathan A. Webster Simon C. Mathews
author_sort	Ramy Sedhom
title	Mobile app validation: a digital health scorecard approach
title_short	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_sort	mobile app validation: a digital health scorecard approach
publisher	Nature Portfolio
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/b4dcaf0179ca44d8819badc810977a47
work_keys_str_mv	AT ramysedhom mobileappvalidationadigitalhealthscorecardapproach AT michaeljmcshea mobileappvalidationadigitalhealthscorecardapproach AT adambcohen mobileappvalidationadigitalhealthscorecardapproach AT jonathanawebster mobileappvalidationadigitalhealthscorecardapproach AT simoncmathews mobileappvalidationadigitalhealthscorecardapproach
_version_	1718384433020534784

Mobile app validation: a digital health scorecard approach

Ejemplares similares