Improving Predictability and Effectiveness in Preventive Digital Health Interventions: Scoping Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Lifestyle-related diseases caused by inadequate diet and physical activity cause premature death, loss of healthy life years, and increased health care costs. Randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies indicate that preventive digital health interventions (P-DHIs) can be effective in preventing these health problems, but the results of these studies are mixed. Adoption studies have identified multiple factors related to individuals and the context in which they live that complicate the transfer of positive results from RCT studies to practical use. Implementation studies have revealed barriers to the large-scale implementation of mobile health (mHealth) solutions in general. Consequently, there is no clear path to delivering predictable outcomes from P-DHIs and achieving effectiveness when scaling up interventions to reduce health problems in society. OBJECTIVE: This research aimed to expand our understanding of how to increase the outcome predictability of P-DHIs by focusing on physical activity and diet behaviors and amplify our understanding of how to improve effectiveness in large-scale implementations. METHODS: The research objective was pursued through a multidisciplinary scoping review. This scoping review used the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) as a guide. A comprehensive search of Web of Science and PubMed limited to English-language journal articles published before January 2022 was conducted. Google Scholar was used for hand searches. Information systems theory was used to identify key constructs influencing outcomes of IT in general. Public health and mHealth literature were used to identify factors influencing the adoption of, outcomes from, and implementation of P-DHIs. Finally, the P-DHI investment model was developed based on information systems constructs and factors from the public health and mHealth literature. RESULTS: In total, 203 articles met the eligibility criteria. The included studies used a variety of methodologies, including literature reviews, interviews, surveys, and RCT studies. The P-DHI investment model suggests which constructs and related factors should be emphasized to increase the predictability of P-DHI outcomes and improve the effectiveness of large-scale implementations. CONCLUSIONS: The research suggests that outcome predictability could be improved by including descriptions of the constructs and factors in the P-DHI investment model when reporting from empirical studies. Doing so would increase our understanding of when and why P-DHIs succeed or fail. The effectiveness of large-scale implementations may be improved by using the P-DHI investment model to evaluate potential difficulties and possibilities in implementing P-DHIs to create better environments for their use before investing in them and when designing and implementing them. The cost-effectiveness of large-scale implementations is unknown; implementations are far more complicated than just downloading and using apps, and there is uncertainty accompanying implementations given the lack of coordinated control over the constructs and factors that influence the outcome.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,047 | 0,046 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».