ArticleHealth economics2022
Recommendations for developing a lifecycle, multidimensional assessment framework for mobile medical apps.
Article in Health economics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Rewiring care delivery through Digital Therapeutics (DTx): a machine learning-enhanced assessment and development (M-LEAD) framework.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Chatbot-Supported Remote Patient Monitoring for Anticoagulation Management: Health Economic Evaluation Within a Pilot Crossover Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Frameworks for assessing digital health technologies: a scoping review.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026Article
- Which Factors are Holding up the Integration of the Environmental Impact of Health Technologies in Health Technology Assessment? Insights from a Multi-Stakeholder Interview Study.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Article
- Comprehensive policies for scaling systemic and equitable integration of digital health technologies.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Patient engagement for the development of equity-focused health technology assessment (HTA) recommendations: a case study of two Canadian HTA organizations.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2025Article
- Exploring Usability of a Clinical Decision Support System for Cancer Care: A User-Centered Study.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Article
- "Towards harmonizing assessment and reimbursement of digital medical devices in the EU through mutual learning".NPJ digital medicine · 2024Review
- Evaluating the Usability and Quality of a Clinical Mobile App for Assisting Physicians in Head Computed Tomography Scan Ordering: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR human factors · 2024Article
- Developing a Program Costs Checklist of Digital Health Interventions: A Scoping Review and Empirical Case Study.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Article
- Clinical Validation of Digital Healthcare Solutions: State of the Art, Challenges and Opportunities.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Recommendation to implementation of remote patient monitoring in rheumatology: lessons learned and barriers to take.RMD open · 2023Article
- Commercially Available Mobile Apps With Family Behavioral Goal Setting and Tracking for Parents: Review and Quality Evaluation.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2023Article
- Digital Health Applications: Toward a Lifecycle and Pay-for-Performance Approach.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2023Article
- User-Initiated Symptom Assessment With an Electronic Symptom Checker: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Validation Study.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Joining telehealth in rheumatology: a survey on the role played by personalized experience from patients' perspective.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Mobile Health for Asthma.CHEST pulmonary · 2023Review
- Article
- Digital health applications and the fast-track pathway to public health coverage in Germany: challenges and opportunities based on first results.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Recommendations for developing a lifecycle, multidimensional assessment framework for mobile medical apps.Health economics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital health and mobile medical apps (MMAs) have shown great promise in transforming health care, but their adoption in clinical care has been unsatisfactory, and regulatory guidance and coverage decisions have been lacking or incomplete. A multidimensional assessment framework for regulatory, policymaking, health technology assessment, and coverage purposes based on the MMA lifecycle is needed. A targeted review of relevant policy documents from international sources was conducted to map current MMA assessment frameworks, to formulate 10 recommendations, subsequently shared amongst an expert panel of key stakeholders. Recommendations go beyond economic dimensions such as cost and economic evaluation and also include MMA development and update, classification and evidentiary requirements, performance and maintenance monitoring, usability testing, clinical evidence requirements, safety and security, equity considerations, organizational assessment, and additional outcome domains (patient empowerment and environmental impact). The COVID-19 pandemic greatly expanded the use of MMAs, but temporary policies governing their use and oversight need consolidation through well-developed frameworks to support decision-makers, producers and introduction into clinical care processes, especially in light of the strong international, cross-border character of MMAs, the new EU medical device and health technology assessment regulations, and the Next Generation EU funding earmarked for health digitalization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.