Search

Apps that enable contact-tracing are instrumental in mitigating the transmission of COVID-19, but there have been concerns among users about the data collected by these apps and their management. Contact tracing is of paramount importance when dealing with a pandemic, as it allows for rapid identification of cases based on the information collected from infected individuals about other individuals they may have had recent contact with. Advances in digital technology have enabled devices such as mobile phones to be used in the contract-tracing process. However, there is a potential risk of users’ personal information and sensitive data being stolen should hackers be in the near vicinity of these devices. Thus, there is a need to develop privacy-preserving apps. Meanwhile, privacy policies that outline the risk associated with the use of contact-tracing apps are needed, in formats that are easily readable and comprehensible by the public. To our knowledge, no previous study has examined the readability of privacy policies of contact-tracings apps. Therefore, we performed a readability analysis to evaluate the comprehensibility of privacy policies of 7 contact-tracing apps currently in use. The contents of the privacy policies of these apps were assessed for readability using Readability Test Tool, a free web-based reliability calculator, which computes scores based on a number of statistics (ie, word count and the number of complex words) and indices (ie, Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Reading Grade Level, Gunning Fog Index, and Simplified Measure of Gobbledygook index). Our analysis revealed that explanations used in the privacy policies of these apps require a reading grade between 7 and 14, which is considerably higher than the reading ability of the average individual. We believe that improving the readability of privacy policies of apps could be potentially reassuring for users and may help facilitate the increased use of such apps.

BackgroundIn the four months after the discovery of the index case of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), several studies highlighted the psychological impact of COVID-19 on frontline health care workers and on members of the general public. It is evident from these studies that individuals experienced elevated levels of anxiety and depression in the acute phase, when they first became aware of the pandemic, and that the psychological distress persisted into subsequent weeks. It is becoming apparent that technological tools such as SMS text messages, web-based interventions, mobile interventions, and conversational agents can help ameliorate psychological distress in the workplace and in society. To our knowledge, there are few publications describing how digital tools have been used to ameliorate psychological symptoms among individuals. ObjectiveThe aim of this review was to identify existing SMS text message, web-based, mobile, and conversational agents that the general public can access to ameliorate the psychological symptoms they are experiencing during the COVID-19 pandemic. MethodsTo identify digital tools that were published specifically for COVID-19, a search was performed in the PubMed and MEDLINE databases from the inception of the databases through June 17, 2020. The following search strings were used: “NCOV OR 2019-nCoV OR SARS-CoV-2 OR Coronavirus OR COVID19 OR COVID” and “mHealth OR eHealth OR text”. Another search was conducted in PubMed and MEDLINE to identify existing digital tools for depression and anxiety disorders. A web-based search engine (Google) was used to identify if the cited web-based interventions could be accessed. A mobile app search engine, App Annie, was used to determine if the identified mobile apps were commercially available. Results: A total of 6 studies were identified. Of the 6 identified web-based interventions, 5 websites (83%) could be accessed. Of the 32 identified mobile interventions, 7 apps (22%) could be accessed. Of the 7 identified conversational agents, only 2 (29%) could be accessed. ResultsA total of 6 studies were identified. Of the 6 identified web-based interventions, 5 websites (83%) could be accessed. Of the 32 identified mobile interventions, 7 apps (22%) could be accessed. Of the 7 identified conversational agents, only 2 (29%) could be accessed. ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant psychological distress. Digital tools that are commercially available may be useful for at-risk individuals or individuals with pre-existing psychiatric symptoms.

BackgroundDiabetic retinopathy (DR), a common complication of diabetes mellitus, is the leading cause of impaired vision in adults worldwide. Smartphone ophthalmoscopy involves using a smartphone camera for digital retinal imaging. Utilizing smartphones to detect DR is potentially more affordable, accessible, and easier to use than conventional methods. ObjectiveThis study aimed to determine the diagnostic accuracy of various smartphone ophthalmoscopy approaches for detecting DR in diabetic patients. MethodsWe performed an electronic search on the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), EMBASE, and Cochrane Library for literature published from January 2000 to November 2018. We included studies involving diabetic patients, which compared the diagnostic accuracy of smartphone ophthalmoscopy for detecting DR to an accurate or commonly employed reference standard, such as indirect ophthalmoscopy, slit-lamp biomicroscopy, and tabletop fundus photography. Two reviewers independently screened studies against the inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies–2 tool, with disagreements resolved via consensus. Sensitivity and specificity were pooled using the random effects model. A summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was constructed. This review is reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies guidelines. ResultsIn all, nine studies involving 1430 participants were included. Most studies were of high quality, except one study with limited applicability because of its reference standard. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for detecting any DR was 87% (95% CI 74%-94%) and 94% (95% CI 81%-98%); mild nonproliferative DR (NPDR) was 39% (95% CI 10%-79%) and 95% (95% CI 91%-98%); moderate NPDR was 71% (95% CI 57%-81%) and 95% (95% CI 88%-98%); severe NPDR was 80% (95% CI 49%-94%) and 97% (95% CI 88%-99%); proliferative DR (PDR) was 92% (95% CI 79%-97%) and 99% (95% CI 96%-99%); diabetic macular edema was 79% (95% CI 63%-89%) and 93% (95% CI 82%-97%); and referral-warranted DR was 91% (95% CI 86%-94%) and 89% (95% CI 56%-98%). The area under SROC curve ranged from 0.879 to 0.979. The diagnostic odds ratio ranged from 11.3 to 1225. ConclusionsWe found heterogeneous evidence showing that smartphone ophthalmoscopy performs well in detecting DR. The diagnostic accuracy for PDR was highest. Future studies should standardize reference criteria and classification criteria and evaluate other available forms of smartphone ophthalmoscopy in primary care settings.

BackgroundAdvances in experimental psychology have led to a better understanding of unconscious, automatic processes that result in individuals relapsing into their substance-using habits. While some reviews have demonstrated the effectiveness of bias retraining of these unconscious biases, there have been other reviews that have highlighted that bias retraining is not always effective. Other studies have revealed there was no baseline biases among some participants. An examination of mobile bias retraining interventions has also revealed mixed results, with some reporting effectiveness and others null findings. A recent feasibility and acceptability study, done by the authors, revealed that 53% of participants have had no baseline biases and 21% of those with positive baseline biases did not have a positive change in magnitude following intervention. ObjectiveThe aim of this paper was to explore potential variables (demographic and clinical) that could account for the negative baseline biases in the prior feasibility and acceptability study, and to discuss some of the factors that could account for the absence of baseline biases. We also explored potential reasons for why there was no reduction in the magnitude of attentional biases among individuals with baseline biases. MethodsParticipants who were in the rehabilitation phase of their treatment were invited to participate. During the study they had to complete a set of baseline questionnaires, and on each day that they were on the ward they had to complete an attention bias assessment and modification task and rate their cravings using a visual analogue scale. Attention bias was deemed to be present if individuals had a positive score. ResultsIn our study, 53% (16/30) of individuals did not present with baseline attentional biases, and among those with positive baseline biases a total of 21% (3/14) of participants did not have a reduction in the overall magnitude of attentional biases. Chi-square analyses undertaken to compare the demographic characteristics of participants with and without baseline biases did not reveal any significant findings. However, with respect to clinical characteristics, those who had positive baseline biases had experimented with more substances. ConclusionsOur study is one of the first to have explored negative findings in attention bias modification interventions for individuals with addictive disorders. We postulate that several factors could account for the absence of baseline biases and there being no changes following bias retraining. Future research ought to take into consideration these factors.

BackgroundAdvances in experimental psychology have highlighted the need to modify underlying automatic cognitive biases, such as attentional biases. The effectiveness of bias modification has been well studied for substance use disorders. With recent advances in technology, it is now possible to work outside the laboratory with Web-based and mobile-based attention bias interventions. Gamification technologies might also help diminish the repetitiveness of the task and increase the intrinsic motivation to train. The inconsistent findings of the impact of gaming on the effectiveness of mobile interventions call for further work to better understand the needs of patients (users) and health care professionals. ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to involve patients, together with health care professionals, in the design of a gamified mobile attention bias modification intervention for substance use disorders. MethodsThe participatory design research method adopted is that of a user-oriented design approach in the form of a future workshop. In the first phase of the workshop, participants shared their critique of an attention bias modification intervention. In the second phase of the workshop, participants were asked to brainstorm features. Participants were also shown gamification approaches and asked to consider if gaming elements could enhance the existing app. In the last phase, participants were asked to sketch a new prototype. ResultsThree co-design workshops were conducted with health care professionals, inpatients, and outpatients. There were 20 participants, consisting of 10 health care professionals and 10 patients. When asked to identify the limitations in the existing app, common issues identified were those of the design, visual probe task, and the included images. Outpatients were also concerned with the safety of administration of the intervention. In the brainstorming sessions, health care professionals made recommendations as to how the stimulus, the mechanism of responding, and the presentation of the scores could be enhanced. Inpatient participants recommended the addition of functionalities, such as information on the harms associated with the substance use, and for there to be enhancements in the design, images, and task. Outpatient participants perceived a need to improve the images and presentation of the results and recommended the inclusion of gaming features. There were differences in opinion on the inclusion of gaming features, as only health care professionals endorsed their inclusion. In the last phase of the workshop, participants were tasked with the conceptualization of prototypes, and the commonality in the design was for a gradual shortening of the interval for stimulus/image presentation. ConclusionsThe results from this research will guide the development of an app that meets the specific needs of patients and is still based on a pre-existing validated task paradigm.

BackgroundConventional psychology therapies are unable to address automatic biases that result in individuals relapsing into their substance use disorder. Advances in experimental psychology have led to a better understanding of attention and approach biases and methods to modify these biases. Several studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of bias modification among clinical cohorts. The advances in mobile health technologies have allowed remote delivery of these interventions. To date, there is a lack of studies examining bias modification in a substance-using non-Western sample. ObjectiveThis study was designed to determine the feasibility of an attention bias modification intervention and an attention bias modification smartphone app for the reduction of attention biases among treatment-seeking individuals. The secondary aim is to determine the acceptability of the intervention. MethodsA feasibility study was conducted among inpatients who were in their rehabilitation phase at the National Addictions Management Service. Participants were to complete a set of baseline questionnaires, and on each day that they are in the study, undertake an attention bias assessment and modification task while completing a visual analogue scale to assess their craving. Feasibility was determined by the acceptance rate of participation and participants’ adherence to the interventions. Acceptability was assessed by a perception questionnaire. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 22. A thematic analysis approach was used in the qualitative synthesis of users’ perceptions. ResultsOf the 40 participants invited to participate in the feasibility study, 10 declined, yielding an acceptance rate of 75%. Of the recruited participants, 6 participants were diagnosed with alcohol dependence; 17, with opioid dependence; 2, with cannabis dependence; and 5, with stimulant dependence. In addition, of the final 30 participants, 11 (37%) failed to complete all the planned interventions and 22 (73%) completed the perspective questionnaires; of these 22 participants, 100% rated the app as extremely and very easy, 77% rated it as extremely or very interactive, 54% rated it as extremely or very motivating, and 33% reported a change in their confidence levels. ConclusionsOur results highlight the feasibility of recruiting participants to undertake attention bias modification interventions. Participants generally accept use of a mobile version of such an intervention. Nevertheless, our acceptability data indicate that there could be improvements in the existing app, and a participatory design approach might be helpful in its future conceptualization. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)RR2-10.2196/11822

BackgroundAutomatic processes, such as attentional biases or interpretative biases, have been purported to be responsible for several psychiatric disorders. Recent reviews have highlighted that cognitive biases may be modifiable. Advances in eHealth and mHealth have been harnessed for the delivery of cognitive bias modification. While several studies have evaluated mHealth-based bias modification intervention, no review, to our knowledge, has synthesized the evidence for it. In addition, no review has looked at commercial apps and their functionalities and methods of bias modification. A review is essential in determining whether scientifically validated apps are available commercially and the proportion of commercial apps that have been evaluated scientifically. ObjectiveThe objective of this review was primarily to determine the proportion of attention or cognitive bias modification apps that have been evaluated scientifically and secondarily to determine whether the scientifically evaluated apps were commercially available. We also sought to identify commercially available bias modification apps and determine the functionalities of these apps, the methods used for attention or cognitive bias modification, and whether these apps had been evaluated scientifically. MethodsTo identify apps in the published literature, we searched PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Scopus for studies published from 2000 to April 17, 2018. The search terms used were “attention bias” OR “cognitive bias” AND “smartphone” OR “smartphone application” OR “smartphone app” OR “mobile phones” OR “mobile application” OR mobile app” OR “personal digital assistant.” To identify commercial apps, we conducted a manual cross-sectional search between September 15 and 25, 2017 in the Apple iTunes and Google Play app stores. The search terms used to identify the apps were “attention bias” and “cognitive bias.” We also conducted a manual search on the apps with published evaluations. ResultsThe effectiveness of bias modification was reported in 7 of 8 trials that we identified in the published literature. Only 1 of the 8 previously evaluated apps was commercially available. The 17 commercial apps we identified tended to use either an attention visual search or gamified task. Only 1 commercial app had been evaluated in the published literature. ConclusionsThis is perhaps the first review to synthesize the evidence for published mHealth attention bias apps. Our review demonstrated that evidence for mHealth attention bias apps is inconclusive, and quite a few commercial apps have not been validated scientifically.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) often suffer with pruritus. We describe the impact of pruritus on quality of life and how it is managed in a real-world cohort. METHODS: TARGET-PBC is a longitudinal observational cohort of patients with PBC across the USA. Data include information from medical records for three years prior to the date of consent up to 5 years of follow-up. Enrolled patients were asked to complete patient-reported outcome surveys: PBC-40, 5-D itch, and the PROMIS fatigue survey. Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare differences in symptoms between groups. RESULTS: A total of 211 patients with completed PRO surveys were included in the current study. PRO respondents were compared with non-respondents in the TARGET-PBC population and were broadly similar. Pruritus was reported in 170 patients (81%), with those reporting clinically significant pruritus (30%) scoring worse across each domain of the PBC-40 and 5-D itch, more frequently having cirrhosis, and having significantly greater levels of fatigue. Patients reporting clinically significant pruritus were more likely to receive treatment, but 33% had never received treatment (no itch = 43.9%, mild itch = 38.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of pruritus was high in this population, and those reporting clinically significant pruritus had a higher likelihood of having advanced disease and worse quality of life. However, this study found that pruritus in PBC is under-treated. This may be due in part to ineffectiveness of current treatments, poor tolerance, or the lack of FDA-approved medications for pruritus.