Key result
This state-of-the-art review assesses the current literature on mobile health (mHealth) technologies to provide a framework for understanding device, patient, and clinical factors in digital health.
This state-of-the-art review provides a comprehensive framework for understanding the integration, regulation, and clinical utility of mobile health technologies in modern healthcare.
The convergence of science and technology in our dynamic digital era has resulted in the development of innovative digital health devices that allow easy and accurate characterization in health and disease. Technological advancements and the miniaturization of diagnostic instruments to modern smartphone-connected and mobile health (mHealth) devices such as the iECG, handheld ultrasound, and lab-on-a-chip technologies have led to increasing enthusiasm for patient care with promises to decrease healthcare costs and to improve outcomes. This 'hype' for mHealth has recently intersected with the 'real world' and is providing important insights into how patients and practitioners are utilizing digital health technologies. It is also raising important questions regarding the evidence supporting widespread device use. In this state-of-the-art review, we assess the current literature of mHealth and aim to provide a framework for the advances in mHealth by understanding the various device, patient, and clinical factors as they relate to digital health from device designs and patient engagement, to clinical workflow and device regulation. We also outline new strategies for generation and analysis of mHealth data at the individual and population-based levels.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bhavnani et al. (2016) reported a review. Mobile health (mHealth) technologies was evaluated. This state-of-the-art review assesses the current literature on mobile health (mHealth) technologies to provide a framework for understanding device, patient, and clinical factors in digital health.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: