Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Methodological challenges in systematic reviews of mHealth interventions: survey and consensus-based recommendations
Author: Lopez-Alcalde, Jesus  
Wieland, Lisa Susan  
Barth, Jürgen  
Grainger, Rebecca  
Baxter, Nancy  
Heron, Neil  
Triantafyllidis, Andreas  
Carrion, Carme  
Trecca, Eleonora M.C.  
Holl, Felix  
Wägner, Ana Maria
Edney, Sarah  
Yan, Yuqian
Campos Asensio, Concepcion  
Villanueva, Gemma  
Ramsey, Rachelle  
Witt, Prof. Dr. med., Claudia M.  
Citation: Lopez-Alcalde, J. [Jesus], Wieland, L.S. [L. Susan], Barth, J. [Jürgen], Grainger, R. [Rebecca], Baxter, N. [Nancy], Heron, N. [Neil], ... & Witt, C.M. [Claudia M.](2024). Methodological challenges in systematic reviews of mHealth interventions: survey and consensus-based recommendations. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 184, 105345. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2024.105345
Abstract: Objective. Mobile Health (mHealth) refers to using mobile devices to support health. This study aimed to identify specific methodological challenges in systematic reviews (SRs) of mHealth interventions and to develop guidance for addressing selected challenges. Study Design and Setting: Two-phase participatory research project. First, we sent an online survey to corresponding authors of SRs of mHealth interventions. On a five-category scale, survey respondents rated how challenging they found 24 methodological aspects in SRs of mHealth interventions compared to non-mHealth intervention SRs. Second, a subset of survey respondents participated in an online workshop to discuss recommendations to address the most challenging methodological aspects identified in the survey. Finally, consensus-based recommendations were developed based on the workshop discussion and subsequent interaction via email with the workshop participants and two external mHealth SR authors. Results. We contacted 953 corresponding authors of mHealth intervention SRs, of whom 50 (5 %) completed the survey. All the respondents identified at least one methodological aspect as more or much more challenging in mHealth intervention SRs than in non-mHealth SRs. A median of 11 (IQR 7.25–15) out of 24 aspects (46 %) were rated as more or much more challenging. Those most frequently reported were: defining intervention intensity and components (85 %), extracting mHealth intervention details (71 %), dealing with dynamic research with evolving interventions (70 %), assessing intervention integrity (69 %), defining the intervention (66 %) and maintaining an updated review (65 %). Eleven survey respondents participated in the workshop (five had authored more than three mHealth SRs). Eighteen consensus-based recommendations were developed to address issues related to mHealth intervention integrity and to keep mHealth SRs up to date. Conclusion. mHealth SRs present specific methodological challenges compared to non-mHealth interventions, particularly related to intervention integrity and keeping SRs current. Our recommendations for addressing these challenges can improve mHealth SRs.
Keywords: digital health
systematic reviews
Document type: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Version: info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Issue Date: Apr-2024
Publication license:  
Linked data:
Appears in Collections:Articles
Articles cientÍfics

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Lopez_ijmi_Methodological.pdf2,88 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View statistics

This item is licensed under aCreative Commons License Creative Commons