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
. 2022 May 16;22(10):3787.
doi: 10.3390/s22103787.

Smartphone as a Disease Screening Tool: A Systematic Review

Affiliations

Smartphone as a Disease Screening Tool: A Systematic Review

Jeban Chandir Moses et al. Sensors (Basel). .

Abstract

Disease screening identifies a disease in an individual/community early to effectively prevent or treat the condition. COVID-19 has restricted hospital visits for screening and other healthcare services resulting in the disruption of screening for cancer, diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases. Smartphone technologies, coupled with built-in sensors and wireless technologies, enable the smartphone to function as a disease-screening and monitoring device with negligible additional costs and potentially higher quality results. Thus, we sought to evaluate the use of smartphone applications for disease screening and the acceptability of this technology in the medical and healthcare sectors. We followed a systematic review process using four databases, including Medline Complete, Web of Science, Embase, and Proquest. We included articles published in English examining smartphone application utilisation in disease screening. Further, we presented and discussed the primary outcomes of the research articles and their statistically significant value. The initial search yielded 1046 studies for the initial title and abstract screening. Of the 105 articles eligible for full-text screening, we selected nine studies and discussed them in detail under four main categories: an overview of the literature reviewed, participant characteristics, disease screening, and technology acceptance. According to our objective, we further evaluated the disease-screening approaches and classified them as clinically administered screening (33%, n = 3), health-worker-administered screening (33%, n = 3), and home-based screening (33%, n = 3). Finally, we analysed the technology acceptance among the users and healthcare practitioners. We observed a significant statistical relationship between smartphone applications and standard clinical screening. We also reviewed user acceptance of these smartphone applications. Hence, we set out critical considerations to provide equitable healthcare solutions without barriers when designing, developing, and deploying smartphone solutions. The findings may increase research opportunities for the evaluation of smartphone solutions as valid and reliable screening solutions.

Keywords: chronic disease; disease screening; mobile solutions; smartphone applications; technology; technology acceptance.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram for selection of articles (adapted from [11]).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Disease-screening apps screen eye disease, cardiovascular disease, central sleep apnoea, cognitive functions, hearing loss, and depression.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Disease screening and significant outcomes.
Figure 4
Figure 4
mHealth screening process (illustrated from reference [15,16,22,39,40,52]).

References

    1. Wickramasinghe N., John B., George J., Vogel D. Achieving Value-Based Care in Chronic Disease Management: Intervention Study. JMIR Diabetes. 2019;4:e10368. doi: 10.2196/10368. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wilson J.M.G., Jungner G., World Health Organization . Principles and Practice of Screening for Disease. World Health Organization; Geneva, Switzerland: 1968.
    1. Iragorri N., Spackman E. Assessing the value of screening tools: Reviewing the challenges and opportunities of cost-effectiveness analysis. Public Health Rev. 2018;39:17. doi: 10.1186/s40985-018-0093-8. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Adibi S., editor. Mobile Health. Springer; Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: 2015. Introduction; pp. 1–7. (Springer Series in Bio-Neuroinformatics).
    1. Jeffery M.M., D’Onofrio G., Paek H., Platts-Mills T.F., Soares W.E., Hoppe J.A., Genes N., Nath B., Melnick E.R. Trends in Emergency Department Visits and Hospital Admissions in Health Care Systems in 5 States in the First Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic in the US. JAMA Intern. Med. 2020;180:1328–1333. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.3288. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types