用于伤口评估和监测的移动应用程序:局限、进步与机遇。

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of Medical Systems Pub Date : 2024-08-24 DOI:10.1007/s10916-024-02091-x
Muhammad Ashad Kabir, Sabiha Samad, Fahmida Ahmed, Samsun Naher, Jill Featherston, Craig Laird, Sayed Ahmed
{"title":"用于伤口评估和监测的移动应用程序:局限、进步与机遇。","authors":"Muhammad Ashad Kabir, Sabiha Samad, Fahmida Ahmed, Samsun Naher, Jill Featherston, Craig Laird, Sayed Ahmed","doi":"10.1007/s10916-024-02091-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>With the proliferation of wound assessment apps across various app stores and the increasing integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare apps, there is a growing need for a comprehensive evaluation system. Current apps lack sufficient evidence-based reliability, prompting the necessity for a systematic assessment. The objectives of this study are to evaluate the wound assessment and monitoring apps, identify limitations, and outline opportunities for future app development. An electronic search across two major app stores (Google Play store, and Apple App Store) was conducted and the selected apps were rated by three independent raters. A total of 170 apps were discovered, and 10 were selected for review based on a set of inclusion and exclusion criteria. By modifying existing scales, an app rating scale for wound assessment apps is created and used to evaluate the selected ten apps. Our rating scale evaluates apps' functionality and software quality characteristics. Most apps in the app stores, according to our evaluation, do not meet the overall requirements for wound monitoring and assessment. All the apps that we reviewed are focused on practitioners and doctors. According to our evaluation, the app ImitoWound got the highest mean score of 4.24. But this app has 7 criteria among our 11 functionalities criteria. Finally, we have recommended future opportunities to leverage advanced techniques, particularly those involving artificial intelligence, to enhance the functionality and efficacy of wound assessment apps. This research serves as a valuable resource for future developers and researchers seeking to enhance the design of wound assessment-based applications, encompassing improvements in both software quality and functionality.</p>","PeriodicalId":16338,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Systems","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11344716/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mobile Apps for Wound Assessment and Monitoring: Limitations, Advancements and Opportunities.\",\"authors\":\"Muhammad Ashad Kabir, Sabiha Samad, Fahmida Ahmed, Samsun Naher, Jill Featherston, Craig Laird, Sayed Ahmed\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10916-024-02091-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>With the proliferation of wound assessment apps across various app stores and the increasing integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare apps, there is a growing need for a comprehensive evaluation system. Current apps lack sufficient evidence-based reliability, prompting the necessity for a systematic assessment. The objectives of this study are to evaluate the wound assessment and monitoring apps, identify limitations, and outline opportunities for future app development. An electronic search across two major app stores (Google Play store, and Apple App Store) was conducted and the selected apps were rated by three independent raters. A total of 170 apps were discovered, and 10 were selected for review based on a set of inclusion and exclusion criteria. By modifying existing scales, an app rating scale for wound assessment apps is created and used to evaluate the selected ten apps. Our rating scale evaluates apps' functionality and software quality characteristics. Most apps in the app stores, according to our evaluation, do not meet the overall requirements for wound monitoring and assessment. All the apps that we reviewed are focused on practitioners and doctors. According to our evaluation, the app ImitoWound got the highest mean score of 4.24. But this app has 7 criteria among our 11 functionalities criteria. Finally, we have recommended future opportunities to leverage advanced techniques, particularly those involving artificial intelligence, to enhance the functionality and efficacy of wound assessment apps. This research serves as a valuable resource for future developers and researchers seeking to enhance the design of wound assessment-based applications, encompassing improvements in both software quality and functionality.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16338,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Systems\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11344716/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-024-02091-x\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Systems","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-024-02091-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着伤口评估应用程序在各种应用程序商店中大量涌现,以及人工智能(AI)在医疗保健应用程序中的不断融入,人们对综合评估系统的需求日益增长。目前的应用程序缺乏足够的循证可靠性,因此有必要进行系统评估。本研究的目的是评估伤口评估和监测应用程序,找出其局限性,并概述未来应用程序开发的机遇。我们在两大应用商店(Google Play 商店和苹果应用商店)进行了电子搜索,并由三名独立评分员对所选应用进行评分。共发现了 170 个应用程序,根据一系列纳入和排除标准,选出了 10 个进行审查。通过修改现有量表,我们创建了伤口评估应用程序评级量表,并用于评估所选的 10 款应用程序。我们的评分表主要评估应用程序的功能和软件质量特征。根据我们的评估,应用程序商店中的大多数应用程序都不符合伤口监测和评估的总体要求。我们评测的所有应用程序都主要面向从业人员和医生。根据我们的评估,ImitoWound 应用程序的平均得分最高,为 4.24 分。但在 11 项功能标准中,该应用程序只有 7 项标准。最后,我们建议未来有机会利用先进技术,特别是涉及人工智能的技术,来增强伤口评估应用程序的功能和功效。这项研究为未来的开发人员和研究人员提供了宝贵的资源,帮助他们改进基于伤口评估的应用程序的设计,包括软件质量和功能的改进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Mobile Apps for Wound Assessment and Monitoring: Limitations, Advancements and Opportunities.

With the proliferation of wound assessment apps across various app stores and the increasing integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare apps, there is a growing need for a comprehensive evaluation system. Current apps lack sufficient evidence-based reliability, prompting the necessity for a systematic assessment. The objectives of this study are to evaluate the wound assessment and monitoring apps, identify limitations, and outline opportunities for future app development. An electronic search across two major app stores (Google Play store, and Apple App Store) was conducted and the selected apps were rated by three independent raters. A total of 170 apps were discovered, and 10 were selected for review based on a set of inclusion and exclusion criteria. By modifying existing scales, an app rating scale for wound assessment apps is created and used to evaluate the selected ten apps. Our rating scale evaluates apps' functionality and software quality characteristics. Most apps in the app stores, according to our evaluation, do not meet the overall requirements for wound monitoring and assessment. All the apps that we reviewed are focused on practitioners and doctors. According to our evaluation, the app ImitoWound got the highest mean score of 4.24. But this app has 7 criteria among our 11 functionalities criteria. Finally, we have recommended future opportunities to leverage advanced techniques, particularly those involving artificial intelligence, to enhance the functionality and efficacy of wound assessment apps. This research serves as a valuable resource for future developers and researchers seeking to enhance the design of wound assessment-based applications, encompassing improvements in both software quality and functionality.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Systems
Journal of Medical Systems 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
1.90%
发文量
83
审稿时长
4.8 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Systems provides a forum for the presentation and discussion of the increasingly extensive applications of new systems techniques and methods in hospital clinic and physician''s office administration; pathology radiology and pharmaceutical delivery systems; medical records storage and retrieval; and ancillary patient-support systems. The journal publishes informative articles essays and studies across the entire scale of medical systems from large hospital programs to novel small-scale medical services. Education is an integral part of this amalgamation of sciences and selected articles are published in this area. Since existing medical systems are constantly being modified to fit particular circumstances and to solve specific problems the journal includes a special section devoted to status reports on current installations.
期刊最新文献
An Artificial Intelligent System for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis in Whole Slide Images. Maximising the Quality of Stroke Care: Reporting of Data Collection Methods and Resourcing in National Stroke Registries: A Systematic Review. An Assessment of an Inpatient Robotic Nurse Assistant: A Mixed-Method Study. High Capacity and Reversible Fragile Watermarking Method for Medical Image Authentication and Patient Data Hiding. Semantic Segmentation of CT Liver Structures: A Systematic Review of Recent Trends and Bibliometric Analysis : Neural Network-based Methods for Liver Semantic Segmentation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1