Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39690747›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2024

Evaluations of digital public health interventions in the WHO Southeast Asia Region: a systematic literature review.

Nachiket Gudi, Elstin Anbu Raj, Beate Jahn, Uwe Siebert, Angela Brand

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of technology assessment in health care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Nachiket GudiDepartment of Health Information, Prasanna School of Public Health, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3322-2964
Elstin Anbu RajDepartment of Health Information, Prasanna School of Public Health, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6511-6982
Beate JahnInstitute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, Department of Public Health, Health Services Research and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT TIROL - University for Health Sciences and Technology, Hall in Tirol, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6764-6362
Uwe SiebertInstitute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, Department of Public Health, Health Services Research and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT TIROL - University for Health Sciences and Technology, Hall in Tirol, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6425-7671
Angela BrandDepartment of Health Information, Prasanna School of Public Health, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0685-5432

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDigital health technologies have been enhancing the capacity of healthcare providers and, thereby, the delivery of targeted health services. The Southeast Asia Region (SEAR) has invested in strengthening digital public health. Many digital health interventions have been implemented in public health settings but are rarely assessed using the holistic health technology assessment (HTA) approach.

methodsA systematic literature review was performed to provide an overview of evaluations of digital public health interventions in the World Health Organization (WHO) SEAR. Searches were conducted on four electronic databases. Screening title abstracts and full texts was independently conducted by two reviewers, followed by data extraction. Dimensions of HTA were analyzed against the EUnetHTA Core Model 3.0. Quality assessment of included articles was conducted using the JBI Checklist for Economic Evaluation and Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 checklist to assess the reporting quality. The findings are presented using systematic evidence tables and bar charts.

resultsOf the forty-three studies screened at the full-text stage, thirteen studies conducted across six countries were included in the analysis. Telemedicine and m-health interventions were assessed in ten studies. Nine studies conducted cost-effectiveness analysis, and five assessments were conducted from a societal perspective. Four studies utilized more than one perspective for the assessment. Health problem definition and current use of technology, description and technical characteristics of the technology, clinical effectiveness, costs, economic evaluation, and organizational aspects were assessed by all the studies, whereas legal aspects were least assessed.

conclusionThe lack of HTAs on digital public health interventions in the region highlights the need for capacity-building efforts.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisPublic HealthTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalTelemedicineAsia, SoutheasternHumansWorld Health Organizationdigital healthEUnetHTAHTAm-Healthsystematic literature reviewtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID39690747
PMCPMC11703627

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.