MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072181779 · doi:10.2196/jmir.1923

CONSORT-EHEALTH: Improving and Standardizing Evaluation Reports of Web-based and Mobile Health Interventions

2011· editorial· en· W2072181779 on OpenAlexafffund
Günther Eysenbach

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Internet Research · 2011
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
FundersWeill Cornell Medical CollegeUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaBezmialem Vakıf ÜniversitesiUniversidad de ValladolidSyddansk UniversitetRadboud UniversiteitUniversitat de BarcelonaRadboud Universitair Medisch CentrumUniversitetet i OsloTrakya ÜniversitesiTehran University of Medical Sciences and Health ServicesMahidol UniversityUniversiteit MaastrichtUniversity of OxfordVrije Universiteit AmsterdamCare and Public Health Research Institute, Universiteit MaastrichtMonash UniversityUniversité LavalUniversiteit van AmsterdamUniversity of LeedsSan José State UniversityMcMaster UniversityUniversity of New South WalesOulun YliopistoGeorge Washington UniversityNorthwestern University
KeywordseHealthmHealthConsolidated Standards of Reporting TrialsPsychological interventionChecklistThe InternetMedicineTelehealthHealth careTelemedicineInternet privacyNursingComputer sciencePsychologyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Web-based and mobile health interventions (also called "Internet interventions" or "ehealth/mhealth interventions") are tools or treatments, typically behaviorally based, that are operationalized and transformed for delivery via the Internet or mobile platforms. These include electronic tools for patients, informal caregivers, healthy consumers, and health care providers. The "Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials" (CONSORT) was developed to improve the suboptimal reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). While broadly the CONSORT statement can be applied to provide guidance on how ehealth and mhealth trials should be reported, RCTs of web-based interventions pose very specific issues and challenges, in particular related to reporting sufficient details of the intervention to allow replication and theory-building. OBJECTIVE: To develop a checklist, dubbed CONSORT-EHEALTH (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials of Electronic and Mobile HEalth Applications and onLine TeleHealth), as an extension of the CONSORT statement that provides guidance for authors of ehealth and mhealth interventions. METHODS: A literature review was conducted, followed by a survey among ehealth experts and a workshop. RESULTS: An instrument and checklist was constructed as an extension of the CONSORT statement. The instrument has been adopted by the Journal of Medical Internet Research (JMIR) and authors of ehealth RCTs are required to submit an electronic checklist explaining how they addressed each subitem. CONCLUSIONS: CONSORT-EHEALTH has the potential to improve reporting and provides a basis for evaluating the validity and applicability of ehealth trials. Subitems describing how the intervention should be reported can also be used for non-RCT evaluation reports. As part of the development process, an evaluation component is essential, therefore feedback from authors will be solicited, and a before-after study will evaluate whether reporting has been improved.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.672
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.816
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.6720.816
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.025
Bibliometrics0.0250.026
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0120.010
Open science0.0090.016
Research integrity0.0090.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.165
GPT teacher head0.565
Teacher spread0.400 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReporting
GenreEditorial

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2,025
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Internet ResearchSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207