ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2026
Engagement of Users in Digital Health Applications: Scoping Review.
Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The role of behavioral nudges in sustaining public health engagement through the "Tawakkalna" app: insights from healthcare professionals.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Mobile health (mHealth) uses mobile technology as a tool for prevention and health promotion. Research indicates that user engagement is crucial for effective mHealth interventions and improved health outcomes. However, many studies report low adoption rates, rapid decline after initial use, and a lack of acknowledgment of user implications in achieving outcomes. Thus, conceptualizing participation in mHealth is essential to identify key determinants for engaging users. Objective: This scoping review aims to identify and characterize the attributes and definitions of user engagement in mHealth, examine engagement methods, and analyze barriers and facilitators influencing participation. Methods: Following the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines, Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed databases were searched for publications between 2000 and 2025 with a 2-stage selection process. Results: Out of 2489 articles identified, 1416 were screened, and 52 met the inclusion criteria. Half were recently published in the last 5 years (2020-2025). Existing literature focused on digital interventions for specific populations and health topics. Analysis revealed four main perspectives on engagement in mHealth: (1) usage metrics, (2) subjective user experiences, (3) a hybrid approach that combines both, and (4) a goal-oriented perspective (behavior change or health outcomes). Conclusions: To understand the complexity and multifactorial nature of participation, it is relevant to conceptualize it as a dynamic mechanism enabling users to achieve their objectives. Both quantitative use and subjective user experience should be integrated to reach the optimal intervention dose. Recognizing users' evolving needs, uniqueness, and their socioenvironmental context interdependence, it is essential to involve users in all stages (design, implementation, and iterative evaluation of mHealth). Findings will inform an e-Delphi study to establish consensus on engagement criteria.
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.