PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: The number of mHealth apps has increased rapidly during recent years. Literature suggests a number of problems and barriers to the adoption of mHealth apps, including issues such as validity, usability, as well as data privacy and security. Continuous quality assessment and assurance systems might help to overcome these barriers. Aim of this scoping review was to collate literature on quality assessment tools and quality assurance systems for mHealth apps, compile the components of the tools, and derive overarching quality dimensions, which are potentially relevant for the continuous quality assessment of mHealth apps.
UNASSIGNED: Literature searches were performed in Medline, EMBASE and PsycInfo. Articles in English or German language were included if they contained information on development, application, or validation of generic concepts of quality assessment or quality assurance of mHealth apps. Screening and extraction were carried out by two researchers independently. Identified quality criteria and aspects were extracted and clustered into quality dimensions.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 70 publications met inclusion criteria. Included publications contain information on five quality assurance systems and further 24 quality assessment tools for mHealth apps. Of these 29 systems/tools, 8 were developed for the assessment of mHealth apps for specific diseases, 16 for assessing mHealth apps for all fields of health and another five are not restricted to health apps. Identified quality criteria and aspects were extracted and grouped into a total of 14 quality dimensions, namely \"information and transparency\", \"validity and (added) value\", \"(medical) safety\", \"interoperability and compatibility\", \"actuality\", \"engagement\", \"data privacy and data security\", \"usability and design\", \"technology\", \"organizational aspects\", \"social aspects\", \"legal aspects\", \"equity and equality\", and \"cost(-effectiveness)\".
UNASSIGNED: This scoping review provides a broad overview of existing quality assessment and assurance systems. Many of the tools included cover only a few dimensions and aspects and therefore do not allow for a comprehensive quality assessment or quality assurance. Our findings can contribute to the development of continuous quality assessment and assurance systems for mHealth apps.
UNASSIGNED: https://www.researchprotocols.org/2022/7/e36974/, International Registered Report Identifier, IRRID (DERR1-10.2196/36974).
UNASSIGNED: Literature searches were performed in Medline, EMBASE and PsycInfo. Articles in English or German language were included if they contained information on development, application, or validation of generic concepts of quality assessment or quality assurance of mHealth apps. Screening and extraction were carried out by two researchers independently. Identified quality criteria and aspects were extracted and clustered into quality dimensions.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 70 publications met inclusion criteria. Included publications contain information on five quality assurance systems and further 24 quality assessment tools for mHealth apps. Of these 29 systems/tools, 8 were developed for the assessment of mHealth apps for specific diseases, 16 for assessing mHealth apps for all fields of health and another five are not restricted to health apps. Identified quality criteria and aspects were extracted and grouped into a total of 14 quality dimensions, namely \"information and transparency\", \"validity and (added) value\", \"(medical) safety\", \"interoperability and compatibility\", \"actuality\", \"engagement\", \"data privacy and data security\", \"usability and design\", \"technology\", \"organizational aspects\", \"social aspects\", \"legal aspects\", \"equity and equality\", and \"cost(-effectiveness)\".
UNASSIGNED: This scoping review provides a broad overview of existing quality assessment and assurance systems. Many of the tools included cover only a few dimensions and aspects and therefore do not allow for a comprehensive quality assessment or quality assurance. Our findings can contribute to the development of continuous quality assessment and assurance systems for mHealth apps.
UNASSIGNED: https://www.researchprotocols.org/2022/7/e36974/, International Registered Report Identifier, IRRID (DERR1-10.2196/36974).
摘要：
近年来，mHealth应用程序的数量迅速增加。文献表明，采用mHealth应用程序存在许多问题和障碍，包括有效性等问题，可用性，以及数据隐私和安全。持续的质量评估和保证体系可能有助于克服这些障碍。这次范围审查的目的是整理有关mHealth应用程序的质量评估工具和质量保证体系的文献，编译工具的组件，并得出总体质量尺寸，这可能与mHealth应用程序的持续质量评估相关。
■文献检索在Medline进行，EMBASE和PsycInfo。包括英语或德语的文章，如果它们包含有关发展的信息，应用程序,或验证mHealth应用程序的质量评估或质量保证的通用概念。筛选和提取由两名研究人员独立进行。提取确定的质量标准和方面，并将其聚类为质量维度。
■共有70种出版物符合纳入标准。包含的出版物包含有关五个质量保证系统的信息，以及用于mHealth应用程序的24个质量评估工具。在这29个系统/工具中，开发了8个用于评估特定疾病的mHealth应用程序，16个用于评估所有健康领域的mHealth应用程序，另外5个不限于健康应用程序。提取确定的质量标准和方面，并将其分为总共14个质量维度，即“信息和透明度”，“有效性和（添加）值”，“（医疗）安全”，“互操作性和兼容性”，\"实际\",\"订婚\",“数据隐私和数据安全”，“可用性和设计”，\"技术\",“组织方面”，“社会方面”，“法律方面”，“公平与平等”，和“成本(-有效性)”。
■此范围审查提供了对现有质量评估和保证体系的广泛概述。所包含的许多工具仅涵盖几个方面和方面，因此无法进行全面的质量评估或质量保证。我们的发现可以为mHealth应用程序的持续质量评估和保证系统的开发做出贡献。
■https://www.researchprotocols.org/2022/7/e36974/,国际注册报告标识符，IRRID（DERR1-10.2196/36974）。
■文献检索在Medline进行，EMBASE和PsycInfo。包括英语或德语的文章，如果它们包含有关发展的信息，应用程序,或验证mHealth应用程序的质量评估或质量保证的通用概念。筛选和提取由两名研究人员独立进行。提取确定的质量标准和方面，并将其聚类为质量维度。
■共有70种出版物符合纳入标准。包含的出版物包含有关五个质量保证系统的信息，以及用于mHealth应用程序的24个质量评估工具。在这29个系统/工具中，开发了8个用于评估特定疾病的mHealth应用程序，16个用于评估所有健康领域的mHealth应用程序，另外5个不限于健康应用程序。提取确定的质量标准和方面，并将其分为总共14个质量维度，即“信息和透明度”，“有效性和（添加）值”，“（医疗）安全”，“互操作性和兼容性”，\"实际\",\"订婚\",“数据隐私和数据安全”，“可用性和设计”，\"技术\",“组织方面”，“社会方面”，“法律方面”，“公平与平等”，和“成本(-有效性)”。
■此范围审查提供了对现有质量评估和保证体系的广泛概述。所包含的许多工具仅涵盖几个方面和方面，因此无法进行全面的质量评估或质量保证。我们的发现可以为mHealth应用程序的持续质量评估和保证系统的开发做出贡献。
■https://www.researchprotocols.org/2022/7/e36974/,国际注册报告标识符，IRRID（DERR1-10.2196/36974）。
