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
Review
. 2022 Mar 18:8:20552076221085810.
doi: 10.1177/20552076221085810. eCollection 2022 Jan-Dec.

Digital health for quality healthcare: A systematic mapping of review studies

Mohd Salami Ibrahim  1 , Harmy Mohamed Yusoff  1 , Yasrul Izad Abu Bakar  1 , Myat Moe Thwe Aung  1 , Mohd Ihsanuddin Abas  1 , Ras Azira Ramli  1
Affiliations
Review

Digital health for quality healthcare: A systematic mapping of review studies

Mohd Salami Ibrahim et al. Digit Health. .

Abstract

Objective: To systematically catalogue review studies on digital health to establish extent of evidence on quality healthcare and illuminate gaps for new understanding, perspectives and insights for evidence-informed policies and practices.

Methods: We systematically searched PubMed database using sensitive search strings. Two reviewers independently conducted two-phase selection via title and abstract, followed by full-text appraisal. Consensuses were derived for any discrepancies. A standardized data extraction tool was used for reliable data mining.

Results: A total of 54 reviews from year 2014 to 2021 were included with notable increase in trend of publications. Systematic reviews constituted the majority (61.1%, (37.0% with meta-analyses)) followed by scoping reviews (38.9%). Domains of quality being reviewed include effectiveness (75.9%), accessibility (33.3%), patient safety (31.5%), efficiency (25.9%), patient-centred care (20.4%) and equity (16.7%). Mobile apps and computer-based were the commonest (79.6%) modalities. Strategies for effective intervention via digital health included engineering improved health behaviour (50.0%), better clinical assessment (35.1%), treatment compliance (33.3%) and enhanced coordination of care (24.1%). Psychiatry was the discipline with the most topics being reviewed for digital health (20.3%).

Conclusion: Digital health reviews reported findings that were skewed towards improving the effectiveness of intervention via mHealth applications, and predominantly related to mental health and behavioural therapies. There were considerable gaps on review of evidence on digital health for cost efficiency, equitable healthcare and patient-centred care. Future empirical and review studies may investigate the association between fields of practice and tendency to adopt and research the use of digital health to improve care.

Keywords: Digital health; mHealth; quality healthcare; systematic mapping; technology-enhanced.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
PRISMA flow diagram of the selection process.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Review studies on digital health by the countries and regions.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Simple bar chart displaying the number of included reviews by year of publication (n = 54).
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Bar chart presenting the number of articles reporting the different domains of quality medical care (n = 54).
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Bar chart illustrating the frequency of reviews by reported approaches to improve the effectiveness of health intervention (n = 54).
Figure 6.
Figure 6.
Bar chart providing the information of 15 distinct digital health interventions and the number of reviews reporting their use to improve quality healthcare (n = 54).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Fatehi F, Samadbeik M, Kazemi A. What is digital health? Review of definitions. Stud Health Technol Inform 2020; 375: 67–71. DOI: 10.3233/SHTI200696 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Dorning H. Consensus on quality, http://www.qualitywatch.org.uk/consensus-quality (2015, accessed 16 January 2017).
    1. WHO. Quality of care: a process for making strategic choices in health systems, http://www.who.int/management/quality/assurance/QualityCare_B.Def.pdf (2006, accessed 16 January 2017).
    1. Rahman S, Mutalib A, Baig A, et al. A pilot study on the validation of vis-screen mobile application for vision test J ASIAN Behav Stud 2020; 5: 1.
    1. Yang GL, Tan YF, Loh SC, et al. Neuroradiology imaging database: using picture archive and communication systems for brain tumour research. Singapore Med J 2007; 48: 342–346. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources