Search

Background Patient-generated health data (PGHD) are data collected through technologies such as mobile devices and health apps. The integration of PGHD into health care workflows can support the care of chronic conditions such as multiple sclerosis (MS). Patients are often willing to share data with health care professionals (HCPs) in their care team; however, the benefits of PGHD can be limited if HCPs do not find it useful, leading patients to discontinue data tracking and sharing eventually. Therefore, understanding the usefulness of mobile health (mHealth) solutions, which provide PGHD and serve as enablers of the HCPs' involvement in participatory care, could motivate them to continue using these technologies. Objective The objective of this study is to explore the perceived utility of different types of PGHD from mHealth solutions which could serve as tools for HCPs to support participatory care in MS. Method A mixed-methods approach was used, combining qualitative research and participatory design. This study includes three sequential phases: data collection, assessment of PGHD utility, and design of data visualizations. In the first phase, 16 HCPs were interviewed. The second and third phases were carried out through participatory workshops, where PGHD types were conceptualized in terms of utility. Results The study found that HCPs are optimistic about PGHD in MS care. The most useful types of PGHD for HCPs in MS care are patients' habits, lifestyles, and fatigue-inducing activities. Although these subjective data seem more useful for HCPs, it is more challenging to visualize them in a useful and actionable way. Conclusion HCPs are optimistic about mHealth and PGHD as tools to further understand their patients' needs and support care in MS. HCPs from different disciplines have different perceptions of what types of PGHD are useful; however, subjective types of PGHD seem potentially more useful for MS care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Mental health is one of the major global concerns in the field of healthcare. The emergence of digital solutions is proving to be a great aid for individuals suffering from mental health disorders. These solutions are particularly useful and effective when they are personalized. The objective of this paper is to understand the personalization factors and the methods that have been used to collect information to personalize the digital mental health solutions. Methods: This paper builds on a previous review that analyzed the personalization of digital solutions in mHealth, and expands on the extracted information for the specific case of mental health. Results: Ten mental health digital solutions have been analyzed. The paper focuses on targeted conditions, personalization factors and the methods used for collecting personalization factors. Discussion: The analyzed mental health digital solutions cover a wide range of health conditions. It is remarkable that most articles do not explicitly mention the factors used to personalize the solution. Among the solutions that mention them, there is a great diversity of factors utilized, such as age, gender, user preferences, and subjective behavior. The authors point out the methods for obtaining data to personalize the solutions, including in-app questionnaires, self-reports, and usage data of the solutions. Conclusions: The analysis of current mental health digital solutions emphasizes the need to create guidelines for designing personalized digital solutions for mental health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Physical activity (PA) is the most well-established lifestyle factor associated with breast cancer (BC) survival. Even women with advanced BC may benefit from moderate PA. However, most BC symptoms and treatment side effects are barriers to PA. Mobile health coaching systems can implement functionalities and features based on behavioral change theories to promote healthier behaviors. However, to increase its acceptability among women with BC, it is essential that these digital persuasive systems are designed considering their contextual characteristics, needs, and preferences. Objective: This study aimed to examine the potential acceptability and feasibility of a mobile-based intervention to promote PA in patients with BC; assess usability and other aspects of the user experience; and identify key considerations and aspects for future improvements, which may help increase and sustain acceptability and engagement. Methods: A mixed methods case series evaluation of usability and acceptability was conducted in this study. The study comprised 3 sessions: initial, home, and final sessions. Two standardized scales were used: the Satisfaction with Life Scale and the International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form. Participants were asked to use the app at home for approximately 2 weeks. App use and PA data were collected from the app and stored on a secure server during this period. In the final session, the participants filled in 2 app evaluation scales and took part in a short individual interview. They also completed the System Usability Scale and the user version of the Mobile App Rating Scale. Participants were provided with a waist pocket, wired in-ear headphones, and a smartphone. They also received printed instructions. A content analysis of the qualitative data collected in the interviews was conducted iteratively, ensuring that no critical information was overlooked. Results: The International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form found that all participants (n=4) were moderately active; however, half of them did not reach the recommended levels in the guidelines. System Usability Scale scores were all >70 out of 100 (72.5, 77.5, 95, and 80), whereas the overall user version of the Mobile App Rating Scale scores were 4, 4.3, 4.4, and 3.6 out of 5. The app was perceived to be nice, user-friendly, straightforward, and easy to understand. Recognition of achievements, the possibility of checking activity history, and the rescheduling option were positively highlighted. Technical difficulties with system data collection, particularly with the miscount of steps, could make users feel frustrated. The participants suggested improvements and indicated that the app has the potential to work well for survivors of BC. Conclusions: Early results presented in this study point to the potential of this tool concept to provide a friendly and satisfying coaching experience to users, which may help improve PA adherence in survivors of BC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[Display omitted] Mobile health, or mHealth, is based on mobile information and communication technologies and provides solutions for empowering individuals to participate in healthcare. Personalisation techniques have been used to increase user engagement and adherence to interventions delivered as mHealth solutions. This study aims to explore the current state of personalisation in mHealth, including its current trends and implementation. We conducted a review following PRISMA guidelines. Four databases (PubMed, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, and APA PsycInfo) were searched for studies on mHealth solutions that integrate personalisation. The retrieved papers were assessed for eligibility and useful information regarding integrated personalisation techniques. Out of the 1,139 retrieved studies, 62 were included in the narrative synthesis. Research interest in the personalisation of mHealth solutions has increased since 2020. mHealth solutions were mainly applied to endocrine, nutritional, and metabolic diseases; mental, behavioural, or neurodevelopmental diseases; or the promotion of healthy lifestyle behaviours. Its main purposes are to support disease self-management and promote healthy lifestyle behaviours. Mobile applications are the most prevalent technological solution. Although several design models, such as user-centred and patient-centred designs, were used, no specific frameworks or models for personalisation were followed. These solutions rely on behaviour change theories, use gamification or motivational messages, and personalise the content rather than functionality. A broad range of data is used for personalisation purposes. There is a lack of studies assessing the efficacy of these solutions; therefore, further evidence is needed. Personalisation in mHealth has not been well researched. Although several techniques have been integrated, the effects of using a combination of personalisation techniques remain unclear. Although personalisation is considered a persuasive strategy, many mHealth solutions do not employ it. Open research questions concern guidelines for successful personalisation techniques in mHealth, design frameworks, and comprehensive studies on the effects and interactions among multiple personalisation techniques. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Mobile phone health apps are increasingly gaining attention in oncological care as potential tools for supporting cancer patients. Although the number of publications and health apps focusing on cancer is increasing, there are still few specifically designed for the most prevalent cancers diagnosed: breast and prostate cancers. There is a need to review the effect of these apps on breast and prostate cancer patients’ quality of life (QoL) and well-being. Objective: The purposes of this study were to review the scientific literature on mobile phone apps targeting breast or prostate cancer patients and involving QoL and well-being (anxiety and depression symptoms) and analyze the clinical and technological characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses of these apps, as well as patients’ user experience with them. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature from The Cochrane Library, Excerpta Medica Database, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and MEDLINE to identify studies involving apps focused on breast and/or prostate cancer patients and QoL and/or well-being published between January 1, 2000, and July 12, 2017. Only trial studies which met the inclusion criteria were selected. The systematic review was completed with a critical analysis of the apps previously identified in the health literature research that were available from the official app stores. Results: The systematic review of the literature yielded 3862 articles. After removal of duplicates, 3229 remained and were evaluated on the basis of title and abstract. Of these, 3211 were discarded as not meeting the inclusion criteria, and 18 records were selected for full text screening. Finally, 5 citations were included in this review, with a total of 644 patients, mean age 52.16 years. Four studies targeted breast cancer patients and 1 focused on prostate cancer patients. Four studies referred to apps that assessed QoL. Only 1 among the 5 analyzed apps was available from the official app store. In 3 studies, an app-related intervention was carried out, and 2 of them reported an improvement on QoL. The lengths of the app-related interventions varied from 4 to 12 weeks. Because 2 of the studies only tracked use of the app, no effect on QoL or well-being was found. Conclusions: Despite the existence of hundreds of studies involving cancer-focused mobile phone apps, there is a lack of rigorous trials regarding the QoL and/or well-being assessment in breast and/or prostate cancer patients. A strong and collective effort should be made by all health care providers to determine those cancer-focused apps that effectively represent useful, accurate, and reliable tools for cancer patients’ disease management. Trial Registration: PROSPERO CRD42017073069; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display%5Frecord.asp?ID= CRD42017073069 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6v38Clb9T) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]