Search

BackgroundDiagnostic delays in autism are common, with the time to diagnosis being up to 3 years from the onset of symptoms. Such delays have a proven detrimental effect on individuals and families going through the process. Digital health products, such as mobile apps, can help close this gap due to their scalability and ease of access. Further, mobile apps offer the opportunity to make the diagnostic process faster and more accurate by providing additional and timely information to clinicians undergoing autism assessments. ObjectiveThe aim of this scoping review was to synthesize the available evidence about digital biomarker tools to aid clinicians, researchers in the autism field, and end users in making decisions as to their adoption within clinical and research settings. MethodsWe conducted a structured literature search on databases and search engines to identify peer-reviewed studies and regulatory submissions that describe app characteristics, validation study details, and accuracy and validity metrics of commercial and research digital biomarker apps aimed at aiding the diagnosis of autism. ResultsWe identified 4 studies evaluating 4 products: 1 commercial and 3 research apps. The accuracy of the identified apps varied between 28% and 80.6%. Sensitivity and specificity also varied, ranging from 51.6% to 81.6% and 18.5% to 80.5%, respectively. Positive predictive value ranged from 20.3% to 76.6%, and negative predictive value fluctuated between 48.7% and 97.4%. Further, we found a lack of details around participants’ demographics and, where these were reported, important imbalances in sex and ethnicity in the studies evaluating such products. Finally, evaluation methods as well as accuracy and validity metrics of available tools were not clearly reported in some cases and varied greatly across studies. Different comparators were also used, with some studies validating their tools against the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders criteria and others through self-reported measures. Further, while in most cases, 2 classes were used for algorithm validation purposes, 1 of the studies reported a third category (indeterminate). These discrepancies substantially impact the comparability and generalizability of the results, thus highlighting the need for standardized validation processes and the reporting of findings. ConclusionsDespite their popularity, systematic evaluations and syntheses of the current state of the art of digital health products are lacking. Standardized and transparent evaluations of digital health tools in diverse populations are needed to assess their real-world usability and validity, as well as help researchers, clinicians, and end users safely adopt novel tools within clinical and research practices.

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, and beyond for many businesses, employees have had to adapt to new ways of working due to disruptions in traditional practices. It is therefore crucial to understand the new challenges that employees are facing when it comes to taking care of their mental wellbeing at work. To that end, we distributed a survey to full-time UK employees (N = 451) to explore how supported they felt throughout the pandemic, and to identify whether there are any additional types of support they would like to receive. We also compared employees' intentions to seek help before versus during the COVID-19 pandemic, and assessed their current attitudes toward mental health. Based on direct employee feedback, our results show remote workers felt more supported throughout the pandemic compared to hybrid workers. We also found that employees who had previously experienced an episode of anxiety or depression were significantly more likely to want extra support at work compared to those who had not. Furthermore, employees were significantly more likely to seek help for their mental health during the pandemic compared to before. Interestingly, the largest increase in intentions to seek help during the pandemic compared to before was with digital health solutions. Finally, we found that the strategies managers have adopted to better support their employees, an employee's mental health history, and their attitude to mental health all contributed to significantly increasing the likelihood that an employee would disclose a mental health concern to their line manager. We provide recommendations that encourage organisations to make changes to better support their employees, and we highlight the importance of mental health awareness training for both managers and employees. This work is of particular interest to organisations who are looking to tailor their current employee wellbeing offer to a post-pandemic world.