Technology Evaluation and Assessment Criteria for Health Apps (TEACH-Apps): Pilot Study
Technology Evaluation and Assessment Criteria for Health Apps (TEACH-Apps): Pilot Study
复制标题
DOI：
10.2196/18346
复制
发表时间：
2020-08-27
影响因子：
7.4
通讯作者：
Torous, John
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Camacho, Erica;Hoffman, Liza;Torous, John
背景资料：尽管出现了应用程序评估工具，但仍然没有一个定义明确的过程，可以接受不同的本地需求，严格的标准和当前的内容。显然，需要这样一个过程来帮助在所有医疗领域实施应用程序评估。这样的过程有可能增加利益相关者的参与，并促进对当今应用程序评估模型的兴趣和参与。目的：本研究旨在开发和试点测试健康应用程序（TEACH-apps）的技术评价和评估标准。研究方法：定制一个众所周知的实施框架，复制有效的程序，我们提出了一个新的过程来解决当今实施应用程序评估工具所面临的挑战。作为我们实施这一过程的经验和利益相关者反馈的高潮，我们提出了四个部分的过程，以帮助实施移动的医疗技术。本文概述了该过程的理论，证据和初始版本。结果：教学应用程序过程的设计是广泛使用和广泛适用于所有领域的健康。这个过程包括四个部分：（1）先决条件（例如，收集应用程序和考虑当地需求），（2）实施前（例如，定制标准和提供数字技能培训），（3）实施（例如，评估应用程序和创建教育讲义），以及（4）维护和发展（例如，每90天重复一次过程并更新内容）。教学应用程序已经在我们医院内部进行了测试，并且越来越有兴趣与医疗保健机构合作，在他们的网站上测试该系统。结论：该实施框架引入了一个流程，为利益相关者、临床医生和用户提供基本工具，以围绕应用程序的使用做出明智的决策，并提高应用程序评估的参与度。这一过程的应用可能会导致在卫生保健中选择更适合文化和临床相关的工具。
Background: Despite the emergence of app evaluation tools, there remains no well-defined process receptive to diverse local needs, rigorous standards, and current content. The need for such a process to assist in the implementation of app evaluation across all medical fields is evident. Such a process has the potential to increase stakeholder engagement and catalyze interest and engagement with present-day app evaluation models. Objective: This study aimed to develop and pilot test the Technology Evaluation and Assessment Criteria for Health apps (TEACH-apps). Methods: Tailoring a well-known implementation framework, Replicating Effective Programs, we present a new process to approach the challenges faced in implementing app evaluation tools today. As a culmination of our experience implementing this process and feedback from stakeholders, we present the four-part process to aid the implementation of mobile health technology. This paper outlines the theory, evidence, and initial versions of the process. Results: The TEACH-apps process is designed to be broadly usable and widely applicable across all fields of health. The process comprises four parts: (1) preconditions (eg, gathering apps and considering local needs), (2) preimplementation (eg, customizing criteria and offering digital skills training), (3) implementation (eg, evaluating apps and creating educational handouts), and (4) maintenance and evolution (eg, repeating the process every 90 days and updating content). TEACH-apps has been tested internally at our hospital, and there is growing interest in partnering health care facilities to test the system at their sites. Conclusions: This implementation framework introduces a process that equips stakeholders, clinicians, and users with the foundational tools to make informed decisions around app use and increase app evaluation engagement. The application of this process may lead to the selection of more culturally appropriate and clinically relevant tools in health care.