在非洲利用移动医疗技术寻找结核病和其他传染病病例:系统回顾。

IF 5.4 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES JMIR mHealth and uHealth Pub Date : 2024-08-26 DOI:10.2196/53211
Don Lawrence Mudzengi, Herbert Chomutare, Jeniffer Nagudi, Thobani Ntshiqa, J Lucian Davis, Salome Charalambous, Kavindhran Velen
{"title":"在非洲利用移动医疗技术寻找结核病和其他传染病病例:系统回顾。","authors":"Don Lawrence Mudzengi, Herbert Chomutare, Jeniffer Nagudi, Thobani Ntshiqa, J Lucian Davis, Salome Charalambous, Kavindhran Velen","doi":"10.2196/53211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mobile health (mHealth) technologies are increasingly used in contact tracing and case finding, enhancing and replacing traditional methods for managing infectious diseases such as Ebola, tuberculosis, COVID-19, and HIV. However, the variations in their development approaches, implementation scopes, and effectiveness introduce uncertainty regarding their potential to improve public health outcomes.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We conducted this systematic review to explore how mHealth technologies are developed, implemented, and evaluated. We aimed to deepen our understanding of mHealth's role in contact tracing, enhancing both the implementation and overall health outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched and reviewed studies conducted in Africa focusing on tuberculosis, Ebola, HIV, and COVID-19 and published between 1990 and 2023 using the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases. We followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to review, synthesize, and report the findings from articles that met our criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 11,943 articles, but only 19 (0.16%) met our criteria, revealing a large gap in technologies specifically aimed at case finding and contact tracing of infectious diseases. These technologies addressed a broad spectrum of diseases, with a predominant focus on Ebola and tuberculosis. The type of technologies used ranged from mobile data collection platforms and smartphone apps to advanced geographic information systems (GISs) and bidirectional communication systems. Technologies deployed in programmatic settings, often developed using design thinking frameworks, were backed by significant funding and often deployed at a large scale but frequently lacked rigorous evaluations. In contrast, technologies used in research settings, although providing more detailed evaluation of both technical performance and health outcomes, were constrained by scale and insufficient funding. These challenges not only prevented these technologies from being tested on a wider scale but also hindered their ability to provide actionable and generalizable insights that could inform public health policies effectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, this review underscored a need for organized development approaches and comprehensive evaluations. A significant gap exists between the expansive deployment of mHealth technologies in programmatic settings, which are typically well funded and rigorously developed, and the more robust evaluations necessary to ascertain their effectiveness. Future research should consider integrating the robust evaluations often found in research settings with the scale and developmental rigor of programmatic implementations. By embedding advanced research methodologies within programmatic frameworks at the design thinking stage, mHealth technologies can potentially become technically viable and effectively meet specific contact tracing health outcomes to inform policy effectively.</p>","PeriodicalId":14756,"journal":{"name":"JMIR mHealth and uHealth","volume":"12 ","pages":"e53211"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11384173/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using mHealth Technologies for Case Finding in Tuberculosis and Other Infectious Diseases in Africa: Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Don Lawrence Mudzengi, Herbert Chomutare, Jeniffer Nagudi, Thobani Ntshiqa, J Lucian Davis, Salome Charalambous, Kavindhran Velen\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/53211\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mobile health (mHealth) technologies are increasingly used in contact tracing and case finding, enhancing and replacing traditional methods for managing infectious diseases such as Ebola, tuberculosis, COVID-19, and HIV. However, the variations in their development approaches, implementation scopes, and effectiveness introduce uncertainty regarding their potential to improve public health outcomes.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We conducted this systematic review to explore how mHealth technologies are developed, implemented, and evaluated. We aimed to deepen our understanding of mHealth's role in contact tracing, enhancing both the implementation and overall health outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched and reviewed studies conducted in Africa focusing on tuberculosis, Ebola, HIV, and COVID-19 and published between 1990 and 2023 using the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases. We followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to review, synthesize, and report the findings from articles that met our criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 11,943 articles, but only 19 (0.16%) met our criteria, revealing a large gap in technologies specifically aimed at case finding and contact tracing of infectious diseases. These technologies addressed a broad spectrum of diseases, with a predominant focus on Ebola and tuberculosis. The type of technologies used ranged from mobile data collection platforms and smartphone apps to advanced geographic information systems (GISs) and bidirectional communication systems. Technologies deployed in programmatic settings, often developed using design thinking frameworks, were backed by significant funding and often deployed at a large scale but frequently lacked rigorous evaluations. In contrast, technologies used in research settings, although providing more detailed evaluation of both technical performance and health outcomes, were constrained by scale and insufficient funding. These challenges not only prevented these technologies from being tested on a wider scale but also hindered their ability to provide actionable and generalizable insights that could inform public health policies effectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, this review underscored a need for organized development approaches and comprehensive evaluations. A significant gap exists between the expansive deployment of mHealth technologies in programmatic settings, which are typically well funded and rigorously developed, and the more robust evaluations necessary to ascertain their effectiveness. Future research should consider integrating the robust evaluations often found in research settings with the scale and developmental rigor of programmatic implementations. By embedding advanced research methodologies within programmatic frameworks at the design thinking stage, mHealth technologies can potentially become technically viable and effectively meet specific contact tracing health outcomes to inform policy effectively.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14756,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JMIR mHealth and uHealth\",\"volume\":\"12 \",\"pages\":\"e53211\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11384173/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JMIR mHealth and uHealth\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/53211\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"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":"JMIR mHealth and uHealth","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/53211","RegionNum":2,"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

背景:移动医疗(mHealth)技术越来越多地应用于接触追踪和病例发现,加强并取代了传统的传染病管理方法,如埃博拉、肺结核、COVID-19 和 HIV。然而,这些技术的开发方法、实施范围和效果各不相同,这给其改善公共卫生成果的潜力带来了不确定性:我们开展了这项系统性综述,以探索移动医疗技术的开发、实施和评估方式。我们旨在加深对移动医疗在接触者追踪中的作用的理解,从而提高实施效果和整体健康成果:我们使用 PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science 和 Google Scholar 数据库搜索并审查了 1990 年至 2023 年间在非洲进行的、以结核病、埃博拉、HIV 和 COVID-19 为重点的研究。我们遵循 PRISMA(系统综述和 Meta 分析首选报告项目)指南,对符合标准的文章进行综述、归纳并报告研究结果:我们确定了 11,943 篇文章,但只有 19 篇(0.16%)符合我们的标准,这表明在专门针对传染病病例查找和接触者追踪的技术方面存在巨大差距。这些技术涉及多种疾病,主要集中在埃博拉和肺结核。使用的技术类型从移动数据收集平台和智能手机应用程序到先进的地理信息系统(GIS)和双向通信系统不等。在计划环境中部署的技术通常是利用设计思维框架开发的,有大量资金支持,经常大规模部署,但往往缺乏严格的评估。相比之下,在研究环境中使用的技术虽然可以对技术性能和健康结果进行更详细的评估,但却受到规模和资金不足的限制。这些挑战不仅阻碍了这些技术在更大范围内进行测试,而且还妨碍了它们提供可操作和可推广的见解的能力,而这些见解可以有效地为公共卫生政策提供信息:总之,本次审查强调了对有组织的开发方法和全面评估的需求。在项目环境中广泛部署移动医疗技术(通常资金充足、开发严谨)与确定其有效性所需的更有力的评估之间存在着巨大差距。未来的研究应考虑将研究环境中常见的稳健评估与项目实施的规模和发展严谨性相结合。通过在设计思考阶段将先进的研究方法嵌入计划框架中,移动医疗技术有可能在技术上变得可行,并有效地满足追踪健康结果的具体要求,从而有效地为政策提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Using mHealth Technologies for Case Finding in Tuberculosis and Other Infectious Diseases in Africa: Systematic Review.

Background: Mobile health (mHealth) technologies are increasingly used in contact tracing and case finding, enhancing and replacing traditional methods for managing infectious diseases such as Ebola, tuberculosis, COVID-19, and HIV. However, the variations in their development approaches, implementation scopes, and effectiveness introduce uncertainty regarding their potential to improve public health outcomes.

Objective: We conducted this systematic review to explore how mHealth technologies are developed, implemented, and evaluated. We aimed to deepen our understanding of mHealth's role in contact tracing, enhancing both the implementation and overall health outcomes.

Methods: We searched and reviewed studies conducted in Africa focusing on tuberculosis, Ebola, HIV, and COVID-19 and published between 1990 and 2023 using the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases. We followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to review, synthesize, and report the findings from articles that met our criteria.

Results: We identified 11,943 articles, but only 19 (0.16%) met our criteria, revealing a large gap in technologies specifically aimed at case finding and contact tracing of infectious diseases. These technologies addressed a broad spectrum of diseases, with a predominant focus on Ebola and tuberculosis. The type of technologies used ranged from mobile data collection platforms and smartphone apps to advanced geographic information systems (GISs) and bidirectional communication systems. Technologies deployed in programmatic settings, often developed using design thinking frameworks, were backed by significant funding and often deployed at a large scale but frequently lacked rigorous evaluations. In contrast, technologies used in research settings, although providing more detailed evaluation of both technical performance and health outcomes, were constrained by scale and insufficient funding. These challenges not only prevented these technologies from being tested on a wider scale but also hindered their ability to provide actionable and generalizable insights that could inform public health policies effectively.

Conclusions: Overall, this review underscored a need for organized development approaches and comprehensive evaluations. A significant gap exists between the expansive deployment of mHealth technologies in programmatic settings, which are typically well funded and rigorously developed, and the more robust evaluations necessary to ascertain their effectiveness. Future research should consider integrating the robust evaluations often found in research settings with the scale and developmental rigor of programmatic implementations. By embedding advanced research methodologies within programmatic frameworks at the design thinking stage, mHealth technologies can potentially become technically viable and effectively meet specific contact tracing health outcomes to inform policy effectively.

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
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
JMIR mHealth and uHealth Medicine-Health Informatics
CiteScore
12.60
自引率
4.00%
发文量
159
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: JMIR mHealth and uHealth (JMU, ISSN 2291-5222) is a spin-off journal of JMIR, the leading eHealth journal (Impact Factor 2016: 5.175). JMIR mHealth and uHealth is indexed in PubMed, PubMed Central, and Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE), and in June 2017 received a stunning inaugural Impact Factor of 4.636. The journal focusses on health and biomedical applications in mobile and tablet computing, pervasive and ubiquitous computing, wearable computing and domotics. JMIR mHealth and uHealth publishes since 2013 and was the first mhealth journal in Pubmed. It publishes even faster and has a broader scope with including papers which are more technical or more formative/developmental than what would be published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research.
期刊最新文献
A Remote Patient Monitoring System With Feedback Mechanisms Using a Smartwatch: Concept, Implementation, and Evaluation Based on the activeDCM Randomized Controlled Trial. Implementation of a Technology-Based Mobile Obstetric Referral Emergency System (MORES): Qualitative Assessment of Health Workers in Rural Liberia. Evaluating the Sensitivity of Wearable Devices in Posttranscatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Functional Assessment. Using a Quality-Controlled Dataset From ViSi Mobile Monitoring for Analyzing Posture Patterns of Hospitalized Patients: Retrospective Observational Study. Validity of a Consumer-Based Wearable to Measure Clinical Parameters in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Healthy Controls: Observational Study.
×
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