Cited by 155Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsDigital Mental Health InterventionsHealth, Technology, Consumer Behavior

End User and Implementer Experiences of mHealth Technologies for Noncommunicable Chronic Disease Management in Young Adults: Systematic Review

Open access
Slater, Helen, Campbell, Jared M, Stinson, Jennifer N, Burley, Megan M, Briggs, Andrew M·2017·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Chronic noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) such as asthma, diabetes, cancer, and persistent musculoskeletal pain impose an escalating and unsustainable burden on young people, their families, and society. Exploring how mobile health (mHealth) technologies can support management for young people with NCDs is imperative. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify, appraise, and synthesize available qualitative evidence on users' experiences of mHealth technologies for NCD management in young people. We explored the perspectives of both end users (young people) and implementers (health policy makers, clinicians, and researchers). METHODS: A systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies. Eligibility criteria included full reports published in peer-reviewed journals from January 2007 to December 2016, searched across databases including EMBASE, MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, and PsycINFO. All qualitative studies that evaluated the use of mHealth technologies to support young people (in the age range of 15-24 years) in managing their chronic NCDs were considered. Two independent reviewers identified eligible reports and conducted critical appraisal (based on the Joanna Briggs Institute Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument: JBI-QARI). Three reviewers independently, then collaboratively, synthesized and interpreted data through an inductive and iterative process to derive emergent themes across the included data. External validity checking was undertaken by an expert clinical researcher and for relevant content, a health policy expert. Themes were subsequently subjected to a meta-synthesis, with findings compared and contrasted between user groups and policy and practice recommendations derived. RESULTS: Twelve studies met our inclusion criteria. Among studies of end users (N=7), mHealth technologies supported the management of young people with diabetes, cancer, and asthma. Implementer studies (N=5) covered the management of cognitive and communicative disabilities, asthma, chronic self-harm, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Quality ratings were higher for implementer compared with end user studies. Both complementary and unique user themes emerged. Themes derived for end users of mHealth included (1) Experiences of functionality that supported self-management, (2) Acceptance (technical usability and feasibility), (3) Importance of codesign, and (4) Perceptions of benefit (self-efficacy and empowerment). For implementers, derived themes included (1) Characteristics that supported self-management (functional, technical, and behavior change); (2) Implementation challenges (systems level, service delivery level, and clinical level); (3) Adoption considerations for specific populations (training end users; specific design requirements); and (4) Codesign and tailoring to facilitate uptake and person-centered care. CONCLUSIONS: Synthesizing available data revealed both complementary and unique user perspectives on enablers and barriers to designing, developing, and implementing mHealth technologies to support young people's management of their chronic NCDs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017056317; http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD 42017056317 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6vZ5UkKLp).

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.8888

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Research on the experiences of stakeholders in a policy role is scarce, as is knowledge about the overlap between policy and public (service user) perspectives.

    “Although several recent studies have identified factors that influence the perceptions of stakeholders in different populations [10-12], research on the experiences of stakeholders in a policy role is scarce, as is knowledge about the overlap between policy and public (service user) perspectives.”
  • Our findings align with two other studies reporting that telemonitoring is likely to improve patients' self-care and sense of security.

    “Indeed, our findings align with two other studies reporting that telemonitoring is likely to improve patients’ self-care [28] and sense of security. [12]”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [7]World Health Organization IRIS 2011 2017-08-30 Geneva mHealth: New horizons for health through mobile technologies: second global survey on eHealth http://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/44607 30183215
  2. [43]Baggott C Miaskowski C Feasibility and usability testing of an electronic symptom diary for teens with cancer Commun Nurs Res Spring 2012 2013 Western Institute of Nursing Annual Communicating Nursing Research Conference April 2013 Anaheim Western Institute of Nursing 135
  3. [67]World Health Organization 2015 2017-08-31 The MAPS Toolkit: mHealth Assessment and Planning for Scale http://who.int/life-course/publications/mhealth-toolkit/en/ 30183215

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Slater, H., Campbell, J. M., Stinson, J. N., Burley, M. M., & Briggs, A. M.
Affiliations
  • Curtin University (AU)
  • The University of Adelaide (AU)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Government of Western Australia (AU)
Corresponding author
Slater, Helen
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2017-12-12
Volume
19
Issue
12
Pages
e406
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2771212050
Cited by
155
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 12 · 2016: 1
FWCI
1.97
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)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • eSpace (Curtin University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Curtin University of Technology
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (1132548)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Health, Technology, Consumer Behavior
Keywords
mobile health, non-communicable diseases, young adults, user experience, self-management, diabetes mellitus, asthma, cancer, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, co-design, technology acceptance, implementation barriers, health policy, digital health adoption, empowerment, self-efficacy, behavior change, service delivery, health professions education
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Chronic Disease, Humans, Telemedicine, Qualitative Research, Young Adult

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