OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to identify (1) strategies used to implement web-based apps for health screening, (2) frameworks used for implementing web-based apps for health screening, (3) outcome measures of implementation strategies, and (4) effective implementation strategies.
METHODS: This scoping review was conducted based on Arksey and O'Malley's framework. After identifying the review question, two researchers independently screened and selected relevant literature from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Registry, OpenGrey, ClinicalTrials.gov, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and Web of Science. This was followed by charting the data using a standardized form. Finally, we collated, summarized, and reported the results quantitatively and qualitatively based on the review objectives.
RESULTS: A total of 16,476 studies were retrieved, of which 5669 were duplicates. From a total of 10,807 studies, 10,784 studies were excluded based on their titles and abstracts. There were 23 full-text articles reviewed, and 4 articles were included in the final analysis. Many studies were excluded because they focused on the effectiveness and not on the implementation of web-based apps. Facilitation was the most cited implementation strategy used, followed by reminders, clinical champions, and educational meetings and materials. Only 2 studies used implementation frameworks to guide the evaluation of their studies. Common outcome measures for implementation strategies were feasibility, fidelity, and penetration. Implementation strategies reported to be effective were quality improvement meetings, facilitation, educational meetings, and clinical champions.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a dearth of literature on the implementation of web-based apps for health screening. Implementation strategies were developed without any reported use of implementation theories or frameworks in most studies. More research on the development and evaluation of web-based screening app implementations is needed.
METHODS: The survey-based, cross-sectional study was conducted from January to July 2018 in the twin cities of Rawalpindi and Islamabad, Pakistan, and comprised graduates of either gender aged at least 35 years with access to internet and means of use, and with no current diagnosed medical condition. The self-reporting Cyberchondria Severity Scale was used data-collection along with a demographic sheet. SPSS 21 was used for data analysis.
RESULTS: Of the 150 subjects, 90(60%) were men and 60(40%) were women. A total of 40(26.6%) subjects had low level of cyberchondria, while 35(23.3%) experienced a higher level of it. Mean scores of men on total CSS were slightly higher than those of women (p>0.05). Men also scored higher on compulsion, distress, excessiveness and reassurance subsclaes (p>0.05 each), whereas women scored slightly higherthan men on 'mistrust of medical profession' subscale (p>0.05). No significant gender differences werefound on cyberchondria and its subscales (p>0.05 each).
CONCLUSIONS: Doctors / health professionals may benefit from the findings by focussing on their patients who use internet as a major source of medical information.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among parents of 145 children in the year 2020. Participants were selected using multistage randomisation technique from 10 of the 75 registered government kindergartens in Kota Setar District, Kedah. Data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire. Analysis was done using descriptive statistics and the association between parent's demographic characteristics and the overall perception of digital media use by their preschool children was tested using Chi-square test.
RESULTS: A total of 150 questionnaires were distributed, and 145 were returned (96.7% response rate) out of which 139 were complete. We found that parent's overall perception of their preschool children using digital devices was mixed, where about one-third of them perceived that digital device use was a risk, one-third perceived it as beneficial while onethird were unsure. The common perception of risk was that digital devices impaired children's physical (71.9-90.6%) and intellectual domains (71.9-86.3%) especially causing damage to eyesight (90.6%), causing addiction (86.3%) and exposed to radiation (81.3%). The perceived benefits of using digital device were mainly in the social domain, promoting technology awareness (64.8%), easily accessible and portable (63.3%) and entertaining (64.0%). They also perceived that digital devices promoted creative and interactive learning (62.6%). Parent's overall perception of digital media use was associated with their employment status (p=0.028).
CONCLUSION: Parent's overall perception regarding digital device use among their preschool children was mixed. They perceived that digital devices commonly cause risk to the physical and intellectual aspects of their children while there are some benefits to the social aspects. There is an association between parent's overall perception and employment status.
METHODS: Three search engines were searched on 13 April 2020 for specific Arabic terms on COVID-19. The first 100 consecutive websites from each engine were analyzed for eligibility, which resulted in a sample of 36 websites. These websites were subjected to quality assessments using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks tool, the DISCERN tool, and Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode) certification. The readability of the websites was assessed using an online readability calculator.
RESULTS: Among the 36 eligible websites, only one (2.7%) was HONcode certified. No website attained a high score based on the criteria of the DISCERN tool; the mean score of all websites was 31.5 ± 12.55. As regards the JAMA benchmarks results, a mean score of 2.08 ± 1.05 was achieved by the websites; however, only four (11.1%) met all the JAMA criteria. The average grade levels for readability were 7.2 ± 7.5, 3.3 ± 0.6 and 93.5 ± 19.4 for the Flesch Kincaid Grade Level, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, and Flesch Reading Ease scales, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Almost all of the most easily accessible web-based Arabic health information on COVID-19 does not meet recognized quality standards regardless of the level of readability and ability to be understood by the general population of Arabic speakers.