Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Aug;45(2):228-36.
doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2013.03.017.

Mobile health technology evaluation: the mHealth evidence workshop

Santosh Kumar  1 , Wendy J Nilsen, Amy Abernethy, Audie Atienza, Kevin Patrick, Misha Pavel, William T Riley, Albert Shar, Bonnie Spring, Donna Spruijt-Metz, Donald Hedeker, Vasant Honavar, Richard Kravitz, R Craig Lefebvre, David C Mohr, Susan A Murphy, Charlene Quinn, Vladimir Shusterman, Dallas Swendeman
Affiliations

Mobile health technology evaluation: the mHealth evidence workshop

Santosh Kumar et al. Am J Prev Med. 2013 Aug.

Abstract

Creative use of new mobile and wearable health information and sensing technologies (mHealth) has the potential to reduce the cost of health care and improve well-being in numerous ways. These applications are being developed in a variety of domains, but rigorous research is needed to examine the potential, as well as the challenges, of utilizing mobile technologies to improve health outcomes. Currently, evidence is sparse for the efficacy of mHealth. Although these technologies may be appealing and seemingly innocuous, research is needed to assess when, where, and for whom mHealth devices, apps, and systems are efficacious. In order to outline an approach to evidence generation in the field of mHealth that would ensure research is conducted on a rigorous empirical and theoretic foundation, on August 16, 2011, researchers gathered for the mHealth Evidence Workshop at NIH. The current paper presents the results of the workshop. Although the discussions at the meeting were cross-cutting, the areas covered can be categorized broadly into three areas: (1) evaluating assessments; (2) evaluating interventions; and (3) reshaping evidence generation using mHealth. This paper brings these concepts together to describe current evaluation standards, discuss future possibilities, and set a grand goal for the emerging field of mHealth research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Continuum of mHealth tools
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Krishna S, Boren SA, Bales EA. Healthcare via cell phones: A systematic review. Telemed J E Health. 2009;15(3):231–240. - PubMed
    1. Patrick K, Griswold W, Raab F, Intille SS. Health and the mobile phone. Am J Prev Med. 2008;35(2):177–181. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Riley WT, Rivera D, Atienza A, Nilsen W, Allison SM, Mermelstein R. Health Behavior Models in the Age of Mobile Interventions: Are Our Theories up to the Task? Transl Behav Med. 2010;1:53–71. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Quinn CC, Shardell M, Terrin M, Barr E, Ballew S, Gruber-Baldini AL, Cluster A. Randomized Trial of a Mobile Phone Personalized Behavioral Intervention for Blood Glucose Control. Diabetes Care. 2011;34:1934–1942. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gupta S, Chang P, Anyigbo N, Sabharwal A. mobileSpiro: Accurate Mobile Spirometry for Self-Management of Asthma. Proceedings of ACM mHealthSys. 2011:Article 1.

MeSH terms