Conceptualization of the Understanding of Participation and Co-Creation in Interdisciplinary Research Groups developing Digital Health Technology: An Exploratory Study

To paraphrase a classic, evaluating digital technologies in health is a bit like eating spinach - no one is against it in principle because it is good for you. However, no one would do it unless being asked to. In recent years, the sheer number of digital health technologies that potentially fulfil public health purposes has increased tremendously. The basis for evaluating such tools for public health purposes however has not met this pace, and in particular frameworks for the systematic development and evaluation of digital technologies in public health are rare. Existing frameworks for digital technologies focus on clinical aspects of digital health applications (e.g., NICE Evidence standards framework for digital health technologies), thus lacking both a population and prevention focus. Generic frameworks such as the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) methodology do not contain items specific to digital technologies and public health purposes. Here, we describe the process of developing a framework specific for the development and evaluation of digital public health technologies based on the core HTA model. We conduct a scoping review of frameworks for the development and the evaluation of technologies in public health and digital health, following PRISMA-SCR guidelines. The identified frameworks are then mapped onto the core HTA model to develop additional items specific for the development and the evaluation of digital technologies in public health. These additional items can be used to integrate the development and evaluation of digital technologies for public health purposes within the wider HTA context, making this process both transferable and scalable.

Designing digital health applications for climate change mitigation and adaptation.

The Council for Cardiology Practice of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), in collaboration with the Digital Health Committee (DHC), undertook an electronic survey with 15 question multiple-choice questionnaire sent to 32 461 members of the ESC with the aim to assess the knowledge and usage of digital health (DH) technologies (DHTs) by office-based cardiologists. Of 559 respondents, 57% graded their knowledge about DH as ‘fair’ and three quarters identified the correct definition of DH. Clinical information systems, mHealth Apps, and telemedicine were the most frequently used DHTs, but 41% of respondents had concerns about their ethical and data transparency. Lack of legal clarity, low patient motivation, limited DH literacy, and poor access to DH were perceived as the main barriers to the adoption of DH. Seventy percent of the respondents were aware of the DH pages on the ESC website and 76% of the educational sessions in the DH area during the ESC Congress 2019. Only 16% had not read articles on DH. Eight-eight percent of responders declared that they would ‘probably’ or definitely attend future educational initiatives on DHT.

There are dynamic interactions between (digital) technologies and society. Digital technologies have a(re-)structuring effect on social relationships and social innovations in avariety of ways. Because of these characteristics, technological innovations affect our individual lifestyles and living environments. In particular, the development and implementation of interventions with digital (health) technologies is attracting increasing national and international attention (e.g. telematics GP consultations and app-supported patient education programs).Digital health technologies enable new forms of interaction and knowledge-based reproduction in the field of health. The integration of potential users in the development process of digital health technologies and interventions requires the discussion of new research approaches. The interests, needs, and requirements of users may influence the nonuse of digital health technologies. It is above all the successful implementation, involving potential users, that can have an influence on acceptance and integrative use in the later course of care. The discourse on the participatory development and implementation of interventions with digital health technologies in the field of digital public health presents itself as acomplex process characterized by various theoretical approaches and methodological procedures and requiring representation, evaluation, and classification.

U.S. seniors' digital health and everyday technology use when their health declines are unknown. Longitudinal cohort using the National Health and Aging Trends Study, a nationally representative, annually administered sample of community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries (n = 4,037). We used difference-in-differences to assess the adjusted difference (AD) in technology use from 2011 to 2014 between those with and without health declines. Health decline measures included new-onset dementia; new-onset depression; decreases in activities of daily living (ADLs), short physical performance battery (SPPB), grip strength, and self-reported health; relocation to nursing facility; increased hospitalizations; and new-onset comorbidity. Digital health included use of the Internet to research health conditions, contact clinicians, fill prescriptions, and address insurance matters. Between 2011 and 2014, seniors experiencing health decline used various digital health technologies at low absolute rates (range: 1%-20%). Between 2011 and 2014, use of everyday technology decreased significantly among seniors with new-onset dementia (from 73% to 51%; AD, -26%), decreased ADLs (from 76% to 67%; AD, -10%), decreased SPPB (from 88% to 86%; AD, -3%), and relocation to a nursing facility (from 49% to 22%; AD, -31%) compared to seniors without comparable decline (all p < .05). Use of digital health decreased significantly among seniors with new-onset probable dementia (from 9% to 4%; AD, -6%) and decreased SPPB (from 24% to 25%; AD, -4%; all p < .05). The type of health decline a senior experiences predicts technology use, which may allow better targeting of digital health to specific seniors. Seniors with new dementia, relocation to a nursing home, and declining physical performance seem especially poor candidates for technology interventions.

BackgroundChronic urticaria (CU) is a complex and unpredictable skin condition that significantly affects patients’ quality of life. As the healthcare landscape increasingly integrates digital health technologies, understanding their perceived usefulness in CU management from both patient and physician perspectives is crucial.ObjectiveThis study investigates the acceptance, perceived usefulness, and potential barriers to using digital health services, such as medical apps and video consultations, among patients with CU and their healthcare providers.MethodsA quantitative survey was conducted across multiple specialized centers, specialist clinics, and general practices, involving both patients and physicians. The study utilized standardized questionnaires to assess digital health literacy, technology readiness, and attitudes toward adopting digital health services in CU management. Descriptive and inferential statistics, including Fisher’s exact test, were employed to analyze the data.ResultsA substantial proportion of the 121 surveyed patients and 101 physicians perceived digital health technologies as beneficial in managing CU, with 59.5% of patients and 75.3% of physicians agreeing on their advantages. However, 21.5% of patients and 14.9% of physicians remained neutral, while 8.3% of patients and 4.0% of physicians found these technologies unhelpful. Key barriers to adoption were identified, including concerns over data privacy, limitations in technical infrastructure, and a lack of awareness of available digital health solutions.ConclusionWhile many patients and physicians recognize the potential of digital health technology to improve urticaria management, some remain uncertain or skeptical. Addressing concerns and improving digital understanding is critical to the future implementation and integration of these technologies into care. Due to the cross-sectional design of the study and the self-reported data, further research may be needed to confirm these results.

Mental illness is a pervasive worldwide public health issue. Residentially vulnerable populations, such as those living in rural medically underserved areas (MUAs) or mental health provider shortage areas (MHPSAs), face unique access barriers to mental health care. Despite the growth of digital mental health interventions using relational agent technology, little is known about their use patterns, efficacy, and favorability among residentially vulnerable populations. This study aimed to explore differences in app use, therapeutic alliance, mental health outcomes, and satisfaction across residential subgroups (metropolitan, nonmetropolitan, or rural), MUAs (yes or no), and MHPSAs (yes or no) among users of a smartphone-based, digital mental health intervention, Woebot LIFE (WB-LIFE). WB-LIFE was designed to help users better understand and manage their moods and features a relational agent, Woebot, that converses through text-based messages. We used an exploratory study that examined data from 255 adults enrolled in an 8-week, single-arm trial of WB-LIFE. Analyses compared levels of app use and therapeutic alliance total scores as well as subscales (goal, task, and bond), mental health outcomes (depressive and anxiety symptoms, stress, resilience, and burnout), and program satisfaction across residential subgroups. Few study participants resided in nonmetropolitan (25/255, 10%) or rural (3/255, 1%) areas, precluding estimates across this variable. Despite a largely metropolitan sample, nearly 39% (99/255) resided in an MUA and 55% (141/255) in an MHPSA. There were no significant differences in app use or satisfaction by MUA or MHPSA status. There also were no differences in depressive symptoms, anxiety, stress, resilience, or burnout, with the exception of MUA participants having higher baseline depressive symptoms among those starting in the moderate range or higher (Patient Health Questionnaire-8 item scale≥10) than non-MUA participants (mean 16.50 vs 14.41, respectively; P=.01). Although working alliance scores did not differ by MHPSA status, those who resided in an MUA had higher goal (2-tailed t203.47=2.21; P=.03), and bond (t203.47=1.94; P=.05) scores at day 3 (t192.98=2.15; P=.03), and higher goal scores at week 8 (t186.19=2.28; P=.02) as compared with those not living in an MUA. Despite the study not recruiting many participants from rural or nonmetropolitan populations, sizable proportions resided in an MUA or an MHPSA. Analyses revealed few differences in app use, therapeutic alliance, mental health outcomes (including baseline levels), or satisfaction across MUA or MHPSA status over the 8-week study. Findings suggest that vulnerable residential populations may benefit from using digital agent-guided cognitive behavioral therapy. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05672745; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05672745.

Digital health technologies can potentially reduce health disparities in cancer care. However, the benefits of digital health technology depend partly on users' digital health literacy, that is, "capabilities and resources required for individuals to use and benefit from digital health resources," which combines health and digital literacy. We examined issues for digital health technology implementation in cancer care regarding digital health literacy, via stakeholder consultation. Consumers, health care professionals, researchers, developers, nongovernment and government/policy stakeholders (N=51) participated in focus groups/interviews discussing barriers, enablers, needs and opportunities for digital health implementation in cancer care. Researchers applied framework analysis to identify themes of digital health literacy in the context of disparity and inclusion. Limited digital and traditional health literacy were identified as barriers to digital technology engagement, with a range of difficulties identified for older, younger and socio-economically or geographically disadvantaged groups. Digital health technology was a potential enabler of health care access and literacy, affording opportunities to increase reach and engagement. Education combined with targeted design and implementation were identified means of addressing health and digital literacy to effectively implement digital health in cancer care. Implementing digital health in cancer care must address the variability of digital health literacy in recipients, including groups living with disadvantage and older and younger people, in order to be effective. SO WHAT?: If cancer outcome disparity is to be reduced via digital health technologies, they must be implemented strategically to address digital health literacy needs. Health policy should reflect this approach.

Digital health technologies and health-care privatisation

The rapid advancement of digital medicine and health technologies in neurology offers both significant potential and challenges. This article outlines fundamental aspects of digital medicine related to neurological research and highlights application examples of digital technologies in neurological research. To provide acomprehensive overview of current digital developments in neurology and their impact on neurological research. In this narrative review articles from various sources and references related to digital medicine and health technologies in neurology were compiled and analyzed. The data presented indicate that digital health technologies and digital therapeutics have the potential to decisively shape neurological care and research; however, it is emphasized that acritical evaluation and evidence-based approach to these technologies are essential to determine their actual value in neurology.

Improving the process of evidence-based practice in primary health care requires an understanding of information exchange among colleagues. This study explored how clinically oriented research knowledge flows through multidisciplinary primary health care teams (PHCTs) and influences clinical decisions. This was an exploratory mixed-methods study with members of six PHCTs in Ontario, Canada. Quantitative data were collected using a questionnaire and analyzed with social network analysis (SNA) using UCINet. Qualitative data were collected using semi-structured interviews and analyzed with content analysis procedures using NVivo8. It was found that obtaining research knowledge was perceived to be a shared responsibility among team members, whereas its application in patient care was seen as the responsibility of the team leader, usually the senior physician. PHCT members acknowledged the need for resources for information access, synthesis, interpretation, or management. Information sharing in interdisciplinary teams is a complex and multifaceted process. Specific interventions need to be improved such as formalizing modes of communication, better organizing knowledge-sharing activities, and improving the active use of allied health professionals. Despite movement toward team-based models, senior physicians are often gatekeepers of uptake of new evidence and changes in practice.

The enactment of the "Act to Improve Healthcare Provision through Digitalisation and Innovation " (Digital Healthcare Act; Digitale-Versorgung-Gesetz [DVG]) in Germany has introduced a paradigm shift in medical practice, allowing physicians to prescribe mobile health (mHealth) apps alongside traditional medications. This transformation imposes a dual responsibility on physicians to acquaint themselves with qualifying apps and align them with patient diagnoses, while requiring patients to adhere to the prescribed app use, similar to pharmaceutical adherence. This transition, particularly challenging for older generations who are less skilled with technology, underscores a significant evolution in Germany's medical landscape. This study aims to investigate physicians' responses to this novel treatment option, their strategies for adapting to this form of prescription, and the willingness of patients to adhere to prescribed mHealth apps. Using an exploratory qualitative study design, we conducted semistructured interviews with 28 physicians and 30 potential patients aged 50 years and older from August 2020 to June 2021. The findings reveal several factors influencing the adoption of mHealth apps, prompting a nuanced understanding of adoption research. Notably, both physicians and patients demonstrated a lack of information regarding mHealth apps and their positive health impacts, contributing to a deficiency in trust. Physicians' self-perceived digital competence and their evaluation of patients' digital proficiency emerge as pivotal factors influencing the prescription of mHealth apps. Our study provides comprehensive insights into the prescription process and the fundamental factors shaping the adoption of mHealth apps in Germany. The identified information gaps on both the physicians' and patients' sides contribute to a trust deficit and hindered digital competence. This research advances the understanding of adoption dynamics regarding digital health technologies and highlights crucial considerations for the successful integration of digital health apps into medical practice.

Digital health technologies can potentially increase the efficiency and quality of pediatric palliative care (PPC), yet their use in home-based PPC remains limited. Limited digital health care literacy and inadequate training can reduce confidence and foster negative attitudes, whereas positive experiences and basic digital health care literacy may encourage adoption. This study aims to explore the use of digital health technologies by Norwegian health care personnel in home-based PPC and examine the association between their digital health care literacy and their attitudes toward digital health. A cross-sectional study was conducted from September 2023 to May 2024, with an online survey targeting health care personnel involved in home-based PPC through primary or specialist health care services. Data were collected using selected items from the Norwegian Healthcare Personnel Survey on eHealth 2022, the Digital Health Care Literacy Scale (DHLS), and the Information Technology Attitude Scales for Health (ITASH), alongside demographic characteristics. Higher DHLS scores indicate greater digital health care literacy, while higher ITASH scores reflect more positive attitudes toward digital health technologies. Pearson correlation, ANOVA, and multiple linear regression analyses were conducted to comprehensively explore the relationships and associations among the variables. Health care personnel (n=148) from diverse health care services responded to the survey. Half of the respondents (72/144, 50%) had experience with real-time video consultation, while phone calls were the primary communication method (138/145, 95.2%). Additionally, 55.6% (79/142) of the respondents had limited or minimal access to electronic health records from other health care services. Health care personnel perceived digital health technologies for remote PPC as a supplement (126/135, 93.3%) rather than a replacement for in-person care. Mean digital health care literacy was 18.29 (SD 3.8) on a scale from 0 to 23. On a scale from 1 to 4, the highest recorded scores pertained to attitudes toward digital health technologies in supporting care (mean 3.17, SD 0.39) and the perceived need for training (mean 3.16, SD 0.43). A statistically significant association was found between the respondents' level of digital health care literacy and their attitudes toward digital health technologies in supporting care (β=0.030, 95% CI 0.014-0.047; P<.001). This study examined the use of digital health technologies by Norwegian health care personnel in home-based PPC, their digital health care literacy, and attitudes toward digital health. Despite positive attitudes and high digital health care literacy, use of digital health technologies was limited, suggesting that inadequate digital health solutions may hinder effective implementation. Addressing these barriers is crucial to enhancing the implementation of digital health in home-based PPC. Future research should focus on integrating digital health technologies into existing infrastructure and workflows while exploring their impact on personalized care to ensure high-quality home-based PPC.

BackgroundThere is increasing interest in digital technologies to help improve children and young people’s mental health, and the evidence for the effectiveness for these approaches is rising. However, there is concern regarding levels of user engagement, uptake and adherence. Key guidance regarding digital health interventions stress the importance of early user input in the development, evaluation and implementation of technologies to help ensure they are engaging, feasible, acceptable and potentially effective. Co-design is a process of active involvement of stakeholders, requiring a change from the traditional approaches to intervention development. However, there is a lack of literature to inform the co-design of digital technologies to help child and adolescent mental health.MethodsWe reviewed the literature and practice in the co-design of digital mental health technologies with children and young people. We searched Medline, PsycInfo and Web of Science databases, guidelines, reviews and reference lists, contacted key authors for relevant studies, and extracted key themes on aspects of co-design relevant to practice. We supplemented this with case studies and methods reported by researchers working in the field.ResultsWe identified 25 original articles and 30 digital mental health technologies that were designed/developed with children and young people. The themes identified were as follows: principles of co-design (including potential stakeholders and stages of involvement), methods of involving and engaging the range of users, co-designing the prototype and the challenges of co-design.ConclusionsCo-design involves all relevant stakeholders throughout the life and research cycle of the programme. This review helps to inform practitioners and researchers interested in the development of digital health technologies for children and young people. Future work in this field will need to consider the changing face of technology, methods of engaging with the diversity in the user group, and the evaluation of the co-design process and its impact on the technology.

There is an increasingly diverse range of mobile apps and digital health devices available to help patients manage their health. Despite evidence for the effectiveness of such technologies, their potential has not been fully realized because adoption remains low. Such limited uptake can have direct implications for the intended benefits of these technologies. This study aimed to understand what matters most to US military veterans when deciding whether to use digital health technologies (DHTs) such as mobile health apps or devices to manage their health and compare these factors between veterans with and without prevalent chronic physical and mental health conditions. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of survey data collected from a national sample of veterans who receive care from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), which was predominantly gathered as part of the last wave of a larger longitudinal data collection effort. Among respondents (n=857), 86.7% (736/849) reported currently using or having previously used ≥1 devices to manage their health, and 78.4% (639/815) also reported using either VHA or non-VHA health apps. Considerations most frequently endorsed as "very important" by veterans when deciding whether to use DHTs included receiving secure messages from their health care team about DHTs, knowing data from DHTs would be used to inform their care, and receiving recommendations from providers to use DHTs. Conversely, considerations most frequently endorsed as "not at all important" included seeing information about DHTs on social media, having community support to use DHTs, and receiving encouragement from peers to use DHTs. Considerations did not significantly differ between veterans with or without prevalent chronic health conditions; however, a greater proportion of veterans with prevalent mental health conditions reported the following considerations to be "very important:" seeing information about DHTs on social media, having community support to use DHTs, having other veterans encourage DHT use, and having help from family, friends, or other important people to use DHTs. Understanding what matters most to patients when they are deciding to adopt a technology for their health can, and should, inform implementation strategies and other approaches to enhance health-related technology use. Our results suggest that, for veterans, recommendations from health care team members and knowing that the data from DHTs will be used in clinical care are more important than information from social media, community sources, or peers when deciding to use DHTs, although perceptions of importance regarding the latter may differ among patients with different conditions. Our findings suggest that communication from health care team members to patients, perhaps either in-person or electronically, could help encourage DHT adoption and use.