Cited by 866Digital Mental Health InterventionsMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsBehavioral Health and Interventions

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Developing and Evaluating Digital Interventions to Promote Behavior Change in Health and Health Care: Recommendations Resulting From an International Workshop

Open access
Michie, Susan, Yardley, Lucy, West, Robert, Patrick, Kevin, Greaves, Felix·2017·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract

Devices and programs using digital technology to foster or support behavior change (digital interventions) are increasingly ubiquitous, being adopted for use in patient diagnosis and treatment, self-management of chronic diseases, and in primary prevention. They have been heralded as potentially revolutionizing the ways in which individuals can monitor and improve their health behaviors and health care by improving outcomes, reducing costs, and improving the patient experience. However, we are still mainly in the age of promise rather than delivery. Developing and evaluating these digital interventions presents new challenges and new versions of old challenges that require use of improved and perhaps entirely new methods for research and evaluation. This article discusses these challenges and provides recommendations aimed at accelerating the rate of progress in digital behavior intervention research and practice. Areas addressed include intervention development in a rapidly changing technological landscape, promoting user engagement, advancing the underpinning science and theory, evaluating effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, and addressing issues of regulatory, ethical, and information governance. This article is the result of a two-day international workshop on how to create, evaluate, and implement effective digital interventions in relation to health behaviors. It was held in London in September 2015 and was supported by the United Kingdom's Medical Research Council (MRC), the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), the Methodology Research Programme (PI Susan Michie), and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation of the United States (PI Kevin Patrick). Important recommendations to manage the rapid pace of change include considering using emerging techniques from data science, machine learning, and Bayesian approaches and learning from other disciplines including computer science and engineering. With regard to assessing and promoting engagement, a key conclusion was that sustained engagement is not always required and that for each intervention it is useful to establish what constitutes "effective engagement," that is, sufficient engagement to achieve the intended outcomes. The potential of digital interventions for testing and advancing theories of behavior change by generating ecologically valid, real-time objective data was recognized. Evaluations should include all phases of the development cycle, designed for generalizability, and consider new experimental designs to make the best use of rich data streams. Future health economics analyses need to recognize and model the complex and potentially far-reaching costs and benefits of digital interventions. In terms of governance, developers of digital behavior interventions should comply with existing regulatory frameworks, but with consideration for emerging standards around information governance, ethics, and interoperability.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/jmir.7126

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 32 references

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. West, R, 2016, A Guide to the Development and Evaluation of Digital Behaviour Change Intervention
  2. Michie, S, 2014, ABC of Behaviour Change Theories: An Essential Resource for Researchers, Policy Makers and Practitioners
  3. Christmas, S, 2015, Thinking about behaviour change: an interdisciplinary dialogue
  4. 2016, Optimizing the Nation's Investment in Academic Research A New Regulatory Framework for the 21st Century
  5. 2014, Guidance: Medical device stand-alone software including apps
  6. 2014, Personalised Health and Care 2020: Using data and technology to transform outcomes for patients and citizens
  7. 1998, Data Protection Act 1998
  8. 2016, Regulation (EU) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (General Data Protection Regulation)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 801–866 of 866

Metadata

Authors
Michie, S., Yardley, L., West, R., Patrick, K., & Greaves, F.
Affiliations
  • University College London (GB)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • Public Health England (GB)
Corresponding author
Michie, Susan
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2017-06-29
Volume
19
Issue
6
Pages
e232
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2724146920
Cited by
865
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 75 · 2025: 94 · 2024: 98 · 2023: 94 · 2022: 122 · 2021: 120 · 2020: 94 · 2019: 98 · 2018: 59 · 2017: 11
FWCI
81.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Explore Bristol Research (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
  • Cancer Research UK (22962)
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • Medical Research Council (MR/K023195/1)
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/F029624/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
Keywords
digital interventions, behavior change, health behavior, health care, intervention development, user engagement, cost-effectiveness, health economics, regulatory framework, information governance, ethics, interoperability, machine learning, data science, Bayesian approach, chronic disease self-management, primary prevention
MeSH terms
Delivery of Health Care, Humans, Health Behavior, Telemedicine, Internet

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review