Alvaradoknowles0878

Despite an estimated 300 000 mobile health apps on the market, there remains no consensus around helping patients and clinicians select safe and effective apps. In 2018, our team drew on existing evaluation frameworks to identify salient categories and create a new framework endorsed by the American Psychiatric Association (APA). We have since created a more expanded and operational framework Mhealth Index and Navigation Database (MIND) that aligns with the APA categories but includes objective and auditable questions (105). We sought to survey the existing space, conducting a review of all mobile health app evaluation frameworks published since 2018, and demonstrate the comprehensiveness of this new model by comparing it to existing and emerging frameworks.

We conducted a scoping review of mobile health app evaluation frameworks.

References were identified through searches of PubMed, EMBASE and PsychINFO with publication date between January 2018 and October 2020.

Papers were selected for inclusion ifocus on issues of app security and evidence base. The majority of mapped frameworks overlapped with at least half of the MIND categories. The results of this search have informed a database (apps.digitalpsych.org) that users can access today.

As the number of app evaluation frameworks continues to rise, it is becoming difficult for users to select both an appropriate evaluation tool and to find an appropriate health app. Adezmapimod This review provides a comparison of what different app evaluation frameworks are offering, where the field is converging and new priorities for improving clinical guidance.

As the number of app evaluation frameworks continues to rise, it is becoming difficult for users to select both an appropriate evaluation tool and to find an appropriate health app. This review provides a comparison of what different app evaluation frameworks are offering, where the field is converging and new priorities for improving clinical guidance.

Children accessing healthcare systems represent a vulnerable population with risk factors for poor health outcomes, including vaccine-preventable diseases. We aimed to quantify missed vaccination opportunities among hospitalised children in India, and identify vaccination barriers perceived by caregivers and healthcare providers.

Cross-sectional study.

Two public-sector tertiary-care hospitals in northern India, during November 2018 and March 2019.

We tracked 263 hospitalised children aged 1-59 months through hospital discharge, to assess vaccination status, and document catch-up vaccinations given during the hospital stay. We interviewed caregivers and healthcare providers to assess their perceptions on vaccination.

Proportion of hospitalised children considered under-vaccinated for their age; proportion of missed opportunities for vaccination among under-vaccinated children who were eligible for vaccination; and vaccine coverage by antigen.

We found that 65.4% (172/263) of hospitalised children d sick children had substantial missed vaccination opportunities. Addressing these opportunities through concerted actions involving caregivers, healthcare providers and healthcare systems can improve overall vaccination coverage.

This pilot study confirmed that hospitalised sick children had substantial missed vaccination opportunities. Addressing these opportunities through concerted actions involving caregivers, healthcare providers and healthcare systems can improve overall vaccination coverage.

The health, psychological and socioeconomic vulnerabilities of low-wage migrant workers have been magnified in the COVID-19 pandemic, especially in high-income receiving countries such as Singapore. We aimed to understand migrant worker concerns and coping strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic to address these during the crisis and inform on comprehensive support needed after the crisis.

In-depth semi-structured interviews were carried out with migrant workers diagnosed with COVID-19. The participants were recruited from a COVID-19 mass quarantine facility in Singapore through a purposive sampling approach. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis performed to derive themes in their collective experience during the crisis.

Three theme categories were derived from 27 interviews migrant worker concerns during COVID-19, coping during COVID-19 and priorities after COVID-19. Major stressors in the crisis included the inability to continue providing for their families when work is disruptecare, and social protection during and after this crisis.

We identified coping strategies employed by the workers in quarantine, many of which were made possible through the considered design of care and service delivery in mass quarantine facilities in Singapore. These can be adopted in the set-up of other mass quarantine facilities around the world to support the health and mental well-being of those quarantined. Our findings highlight the importance of targeted policy intervention for migrant workers, in areas such as housing and working environments, equitable access to healthcare, and social protection during and after this crisis.

A compulsory hip check is performed on an infant at 6-8 weeks in primary care for the detection of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). Missed diagnoses and infants incorrectly labelled with DDH remain an important problem. The nature of physician behaviour as a likely source of this problem has not been explored. The aims of this study were to make a behavioural diagnosis of general practitioners (GPs) who perform these hip checks, and identify potential behavioural change techniques that could make the hip checks more effective.

Qualitative study with in-depth semistructured interviews of 6-8 weeks checks. We used the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation and Behaviour model in making a behavioural diagnosis and elicited factors that can be linked to improving the assessment.

Primary care.

17 GPs (15 female) who had between 5 and 34 years of work experience were interviewed.

Capability related to knowledge of evidence-based criteria and skill to identify DDH were important behavioural factors. Both physical (clinic time and space) and social (practice norms), opportunity were essential for optimal behaviour.