liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Evaluating Digital Health Interventions Key Questions and Approaches
UCL, England.
Arizona State University, AZ USA.
Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Karolinska Institute, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4753-6745
Penn State University, PA USA.
Show others and affiliations
2016 (English)In: American Journal of Preventive Medicine, ISSN 0749-3797, E-ISSN 1873-2607, Vol. 51, no 5, p. 843-851Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Digital health interventions have enormous potential as scalable tools to improve health and healthcare delivery by improving effectiveness, efficiency, accessibility, safety, and personalization. Achieving these improvements requires a cumulative knowledge base to inform development and deployment of digital health interventions. However, evaluations of digital health interventions present special challenges. This paper aims to examine these challenges and outline an evaluation strategy in terms of the research questions needed to appraise such interventions. As they are at the intersection of biomedical, behavioral, computing, and engineering research, methods drawn from all of these disciplines are required. Relevant research questions include defining the problem and the likely benefit of the digital health intervention, which in turn requires establishing the likely reach and uptake of the intervention, the causal model describing how the intervention will achieve its intended benefit, key components, and how they interact with one another, and estimating overall benefit in terms of effectiveness, cost effectiveness, and harms. Although RCTs are important for evaluation of effectiveness and cost effectiveness, they are best undertaken only when: (1) the intervention and its delivery package are stable; (2) these can be implemented with high fidelity; and (3) there is a reasonable likelihood that the overall benefits will be clinically meaningful (improved outcomes or equivalent outcomes at lower cost). Broadening the portfolio of research questions and evaluation methods will help with developing the necessary knowledge base to inform decisions on policy, practice, and research. (C) 2016 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC , 2016. Vol. 51, no 5, p. 843-851
National Category
Public Health, Global Health, Social Medicine and Epidemiology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-132837DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2016.06.008ISI: 000386785100029PubMedID: 27745684OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-132837DiVA, id: diva2:1052440
Note

Funding Agencies|NIH Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research (OBSSR); Medical Research Council (MRC)/National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Methodology Research Program; OBSSR; Robert Wood Johnson Foundation; National Science Foundation [1539846]; British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence at Oxford [RE/13/1/30181]

Available from: 2016-12-06 Created: 2016-11-30 Last updated: 2017-11-29

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Andersson, Gerhard
By organisation
PsychologyFaculty of Arts and Sciences
In the same journal
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
Public Health, Global Health, Social Medicine and Epidemiology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 259 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf