BACKGROUND: Digital health interventions (DHIs) have the potential to enable public end users, such as citizens and patients, to manage and improve their health. Although the number of available DHIs is increasing, examples of successfully established DHIs in public health systems are limited. To counteract the nonuse of DHIs, they should be comprehensively evaluated while integrating end users. Unfortunately, there is a wide variability and heterogeneity according to the approaches of evaluation, which creates a methodological challenge.
OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to provide an overview of the current established processes for evaluating DHIs, including methods, indicators, and end-user involvement. The review is not limited to a specific medical field or type of DHI but offers a holistic overview.
METHODS: This scoping review was conducted following the JBI methodology for scoping reviews based on the framework by Arksey & O\'Malley and complies with the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. Three scientific databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Science Direct) were searched in April 2023. English and German studies between 2008 and 2023 were considered when evaluating DHIs that explicitly address public end users. The process of study selection was carried out by several researchers to avoid reviewer bias.
RESULTS: The search strategy identified 9618 publications, of which 160 were included. Among these included articles, 200 evaluations were derived and analyzed. The results showed that there is neither a consensus on the methods to evaluate DHIs nor a commonly agreed definition or usage of the evaluated indicators, which results in a broad variety of evaluation practices. This aligns with observations of the existing literature. It was found that there is a lack of references to existing frameworks for the evaluation of DHIs. The majority of the included studies referred to user-centered approaches and involved end users in the evaluation process. As assistance for people developing and evaluating DHIs and as a basis for thinking about appropriate ways to evaluate DHIs, a results matrix was created where the findings were combined per DHI cluster. Additionally, general recommendations for the evaluators of DHIs were formulated.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this scoping review offer a holistic overview of the variety and heterogeneity according to the approaches of evaluation of DHIs for public end users. Evaluators of these DHIs should be encouraged to reference established frameworks or measurements for justification. This would ease the transferability of the results among similar evaluation studies within the digital health sector, thereby enhancing the coherence and comparability of research in this area.

Augmented reality is increasingly becoming significant in people\'s everyday life in different sectors. Particularly to users with disabilities, augmented reality can be an instructional tool and assistive technology, making it worth a vital tool for users with disabilities. For such an important tool, it is essential to understand how these applications are evaluated in order to improve their throughput and extend their accessibility. In that regard, a systematic literature review for peer-reviewed articles published between 2012 and 2022 was conducted to discover which methods, metrics, and tools/techniques researchers use during the accessibility evaluation of augmented reality applications. The PRISMA methodology allowed us to identify, screen, and include 60 articles from three databases. The finding shows that most researchers use task scenarios as the method, qualitative feedback as the metric, and questionnaire as a tool to collect data for accessibility evaluation. The conclusion and future studies are also discussed.

Nanoparticles are widely used in the biomedical field for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes due to their small size, high carrier capacity, and ease of modification, which enable selective targeting and as contrast agents. Over the past decades, more and more nanoparticles have received regulatory approval to enter the clinic, more nanoparticles have shown potential for clinical translation, and humans have increasing access to them. However, nanoparticles have a high potential to cause unpredictable adverse effects on human organs, tissues, and cells due to their unique physicochemical properties and interactions with DNA, lipids, cells, tissues, proteins, and biological fluids. Currently, issues, such as nanoparticle side effects and toxicity, remain controversial, and these pitfalls must be fully considered prior to their application to body systems. Therefore, it is particularly urgent and important to assess the safety of nanoparticles acting in living organisms. In this paper, we review the important factors influencing the biosafety of nanoparticles in terms of their properties, and introduce common methods to summarize the biosafety evaluation of nanoparticles through in vitro and in body systems.

BACKGROUND: Virtual reality (VR) is a combination of technologies that allow the user to interact with a computer-simulated environment with the experience of immersion, interactivity, and imagination. However, ergonomic problems related to virtual reality have adverse effects on the health and experience of users, which restrict the application of virtual reality technology.
OBJECTIVE: The paper aims to provide an overview of the ergonomics evaluation of VR for further development of software and hardware of VR.
METHODS: This paper describes and discusses the ergonomics issues involved in the software and hardware of VR from three aspects: visual, physiological, and cognitive. The paper also summarizes the research methods and evaluation metrics.
RESULTS: Many attempts have been made to study ergonomics issues of VR, mainly including pressure, muscle fatigue, thermal comfort, visual fatigue, and motion sickness. Ergonomics studies are very valuable for research related to virtual reality. There is a summary table that lists the main evaluation metrics and methods.
CONCLUSIONS: According to current research, this review gives three recommendations for further research on VR, which will be helpful for further human-centered research and design work within the VR industry.

Despite the potential of digital health interventions (DHIs), evaluations of their effectiveness face challenges. DHIs are complex interventions and currently established evaluation methods, e.g., the randomised controlled trial (RCT), are limited in their application. This study aimed at identifying alternatives to RCTs as potentially more appropriate evaluation approaches. A scoping review was conducted to provide an overview of existing evaluation methods of DHIs beyond the RCT. Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and EMBASE were screened in May 2021 to identify relevant publications, while using defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Eight studies were extracted for a synthesis comprising four alternative evaluation designs. Factorial designs were mostly used to evaluate DHIs followed by stepped-wedge designs, sequential multiple assignment randomised trials (SMARTs), and micro randomised trials (MRTs). Some of these methods allow for the adaptation of interventions (e.g., SMART or MRT) and the evaluation of specific components of interventions (e.g., factorial designs). Thus, they are appropriate for addressing some specific needs in the evaluation of DHIs. However, it remains unsolved how to establish these alternative evaluation designs in research practice and how to deal with the limitations of the designs.

In the face of demographic change and constantly increasing health care costs, health care system decision-makers face ever greater challenges. Mobile health applications (mHealth apps) have the potential to combat this trend. However, in order to integrate mHealth apps into care structures, an evaluation of such apps is needed. In this paper, we focus on the criteria and methods of evaluating mHealth apps for cardiovascular disease and the implications for developing a widely applicable evaluation framework for mHealth interventions. Our aim is to derive substantiated patterns and starting points for future research by conducting a quasi-systematic scoping review of relevant peer-reviewed literature published in English or German between 2000 and 2021. We screened 4066 articles and identified n = 38 studies that met our inclusion criteria. The results of the data derived from these studies show that usability, motivation, and user experience were evaluated primarily using standardized questionnaires. Usage protocols and clinical outcomes were assessed primarily via laboratory diagnostics and quality-of-life questionnaires, and cost effectiveness was tested primarily based on economic measures. Based on these findings, we propose important considerations and elements for the development of a common evaluation framework for professional mHealth apps, including study designs, data collection tools, and perspectives.

The taste of chicken soup is dependent upon various taste substances and human senses. More than 300 nonvolatile compounds reportedly exist in chicken/chicken soup. The primary purpose of this review was to elaborate on the prominent taste substances, the taste evaluation methods, and the factors affecting the taste of chicken soup. Most taste-active compounds with taste descriptions and thresholds in chicken soup were summarized. The application of sensory evaluation, liquid chromatography, electronic tongue, and other evaluation methods in chicken soup taste analysis were elaborated. The effects of genetic constitution, preslaughter, processing, and storage on chicken soup taste had been discussed. Nucleotides (especially inosine 5\'-monophosphate), amino acids and their derivatives, organic acids, sugars, and peptides play a vital role in the taste attributes of chicken soup. Combining of liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry enables qualitative and quantitative analysis of taste-active compounds in chicken soup, aiding the exploration of key taste-active compounds. The electronic tongue application helps the overall taste perception of the soluble taste-active compounds present in chicken soup samples. Postmortem aging and stewing for a prolonged duration are effective techniques for improving the taste quality of chicken soup. The washing of preprocessing, the cooking temperature of processing, and the storage conditions also exert a significant impact on the taste of chicken soup.

Potential benefits of mHealth applications are large for chronic diseases. To get an overview of how these applications are being evaluated, a scoping review is being conducted. First results show that single factors are most commonly assessed. The results of clinical outcome measures are the most common. Economic factors are the least common. A uniform framework that specifies different factors and metrics for the evaluation is not apparent.

Severe bone damage from diseases, including extensive trauma, fractures, and bone tumors, cannot self-heal, while traditional surgical treatment may bring side effects such as infection, inflammation, and pain. As a new biomaterial with controllable mechanical properties and biocompatibility, hydrogel is widely used in bone tissue engineering (BTE) as a scaffold for growth factor transport and cell adhesion. In order to make hydrogel more suitable for the local treatment of bone diseases, hydrogel preparation methods should be combined with synthetic materials with excellent properties and advanced technologies in different fields to better control drug release in time and orientation. It is necessary to establish a complete method to evaluate the hydrogel\'s properties and biocompatibility with the human body. Moreover, establishment of standard animal models of bone defects helps in studying the therapeutic effect of hydrogels on bone repair, as well as to evaluate the safety and suitability of hydrogels. Thus, this review aims to systematically summarize current studies of hydrogels in BTE, including the mechanisms for promoting bone synthesis, design, and preparation; characterization and evaluation methods; as well as to explore future applications of hydrogels in BTE.

BACKGROUND: Natural experiments are increasingly valued as a way to assess the health impact of health and non-health interventions when planned controlled experimental research designs may be infeasible or inappropriate to implement. This study sought to investigate the value of natural experiments by exploring how they have been used in practice. The study focused on obesity prevention research as one complex programme area for applying natural experiment studies.
METHODS: A literature search sought obesity prevention research from January 1997 to December 2017 and identified 46 population health studies that self-described as a natural experiment.
RESULTS: The majority of studies identified were published in the last 5 years, illustrating a more recent adoption of such opportunities. The majority of studies were evaluations of the impact of policies (n = 19), such as assessing changes to food labelling, food advertising or taxation on diet and obesity outcomes, or were built environment interventions (n = 17), such as the impact of built infrastructure on physical activity or access to healthy food. Research designs included quasi-experimental, pre-experimental and non-experimental methods. Few studies applied rigorous research designs to establish stronger causal inference, such as multiple pre/post measures, time series designs or comparison of change against an unexposed group. In general, researchers employed techniques to enhance the study utility but often were limited in the use of more rigorous study designs by ethical considerations and/or the particular context of the intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: Greater recognition of the utility and versatility of natural experiments in generating evidence for complex health issues like obesity prevention is needed. This review suggests that natural experiments may be underutilised as an approach for providing evidence of the effects of interventions, particularly for evaluating health outcomes of interventions when unexpected opportunities to gather evidence arise.