Background Mobile health (mHealth) apps have great potential to support the management of chronic conditions. Despite widespread acceptance of mHealth apps by the public, health care providers (HCPs) are reluctant to prescribe or recommend such apps to their patients. Objective This study aimed to classify and evaluate interventions aimed at encouraging HCPs to prescribe mHealth apps. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted to identify studies published from January 1, 2008, to August 5, 2022, using 4 electronic databases: MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. We included studies that evaluated interventions encouraging HCPs to prescribe mHealth apps. Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility of the studies. The “National Institute of Health’s quality assessment tool for before-and-after (pretest-posttest design) studies with no control group” and “the mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT)” were used to assess the methodological quality. Owing to high levels of heterogeneity between interventions, measures of practice change, specialties of HCPs, and modes of delivery, we conducted a qualitative analysis. We adopted the behavior change wheel as a framework for classifying the included interventions according to intervention functions. Results In total, 11 studies were included in this review. Most of the studies reported positive findings, with improvements in a number of outcomes, including increased knowledge of mHealth apps among clinicians, improved self-efficacy or confidence in prescribing, and an increased number of mHealth app prescriptions. On the basis of the behavior change wheel, 9 studies reported elements of environmental restructuring such as providing HCPs with lists of apps, technological systems, time, and resources. Furthermore, 9 studies included elements of education, particularly workshops, class lectures, individual sessions with HCPs, videos, or toolkits. Furthermore, training was incorporated in 8 studies using case studies or scenarios or app appraisal tools. Coercion and restriction were not reported in any of the interventions included. The quality of the studies was high in relation to the clarity of aims, interventions, and outcomes but weaker in terms of sample size, power calculations, and duration of follow-up. Conclusions This study identified interventions to encourage app prescriptions by HCPs. Recommendations for future research should consider previously unexplored intervention functions such as restrictions and coercion. The findings of this review can help inform mHealth providers and policy makers regarding the key intervention strategies impacting mHealth prescriptions and assist them in making informed decisions to encourage this adoption.

BACKGROUND Mobile health (mHealth) apps have great potential to support the management of chronic conditions. Despite widespread acceptance of mHealth apps by the public, healthcare providers (HCPs) are reluctant to prescribe or recommend such apps to their patients. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to classify and evaluate interventions aimed at encouraging mHealth app prescription among HCPs. METHODS A systematic literature search was conducted to identify studies published from January 2008 to August 2022 using four electronic databases: MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL and PsycInfo. We included studies that evaluated interventions encouraging HCPs to prescribe mHealth apps. Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility of the studies. The studies were assessed for risk of bias. Due to high levels of heterogeneity between interventions, measures of practice change, specialties of HCPs and modes of delivery, we conducted a qualitative analysis. We adopted the behaviour change wheel (BCW) as a framework for classifying the included interventions according to intervention functions. RESULTS Eleven studies were included in this review. Most of the studies reported positive findings, with improvements in a number of outcomes, including increased knowledge of mHealth apps among clinicians, improved self-efficacy or confidence in prescribing and changes in current practices. Based on the BCW, environmental restructuring was the most frequently used intervention function in the included studies, followed by education and then training. Coercion and restriction were not reported in any of the interventions included. The quality of the studies was high in relation to the clarity of aims, interventions and outcomes, but weaker in terms of sample sizes, power calculations and duration of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS This study identified interventions to increase HCPs app prescriptions. The findings of this review can help inform mHealth providers and policymakers regarding the key intervention strategies impacting mHealth prescriptions and assist them in making informed decisions to encourage this adoption.

Background Mass gatherings (MGs; eg, religious, sporting, musical, sociocultural, and other occasions that draw large crowds) pose public health challenges and concerns related to global health. A leading global concern regarding MGs is the possible importation and exportation of infectious diseases as they spread from the attendees to the general population, resulting in epidemic outbreaks. Governments and health authorities use technological interventions to support public health surveillance and prevent and control infectious diseases. Objective This study aims to review the evidence on the effectiveness of public health digital surveillance systems for infectious disease prevention and control at MG events. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted in January 2022 using the Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Scopus databases to examine relevant articles published in English up to January 2022. Interventional studies describing or evaluating the effectiveness of public health digital surveillance systems for infectious disease prevention and control at MGs were included in the analysis. Owing to the lack of appraisal tools for interventional studies describing and evaluating public health digital surveillance systems at MGs, a critical appraisal tool was developed and used to assess the quality of the included studies. Results In total, 8 articles were included in the review, and 3 types of MGs were identified: religious (the Hajj and Prayagraj Kumbh), sporting (the Olympic and Paralympic Games, the Federation International Football Association World Cup, and the Micronesian Games), and cultural (the Festival of Pacific Arts) events. In total, 88% (7/8) of the studies described surveillance systems implemented at MG events, and 12% (1/8) of the studies described and evaluated an enhanced surveillance system that was implemented for an event. In total, 4 studies reported the implementation of a surveillance system: 2 (50%) described the enhancement of the system that was implemented for an event, 1 (25%) reported a pilot implementation of a surveillance system, and 1 (25%) reported an evaluation of an enhanced system. The types of systems investigated were 2 syndromic, 1 participatory, 1 syndromic and event-based, 1 indicator- and event-based, and 1 event-based surveillance system. In total, 62% (5/8) of the studies reported timeliness as an outcome generated after implementing or enhancing the system without measuring its effectiveness. Only 12% (1/8) of the studies followed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for evaluating public health surveillance systems and the outcomes of enhanced systems based on the systems’ attributes to measure their effectiveness. Conclusions On the basis of the review of the literature and the analysis of the included studies, there is limited evidence of the effectiveness of public health digital surveillance systems for infectious disease prevention and control at MGs because of the absence of evaluation studies.

BACKGROUND Mass gatherings such as religious, sporting, musical, sociocultural, and other occasions that draw large crowds pose public health challenges and concerns related to global health. A leading global concern regarding mass gatherings is the possible importation and exportation of infectious diseases as they spread from the attendees to the general population, resulting in epidemic outbreaks. Governments and health authorities use technological interventions to support public health surveillance to prevent and control infectious diseases. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to review evidence on the effectiveness of public health digital surveillance systems for infectious disease prevention and control at mass gathering events. METHODS A systematic literature search on the topic was conducted using the Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINHAL, and Scopus databases to examine relevant articles published in English from Dec 2021 to Jan 2022. Interventional studies describing or evaluating the effectiveness of public health digital surveillance systems for infectious disease prevention and control at mass gatherings were included in the analysis. Due to the lack of appraisal tools for interventional studies describing and evaluating public health digital surveillance systems at mass gatherings, a critical appraisal tool was developed and used to assess the quality of the included studies. RESULTS Eight articles were included in the review and three types of mass gatherings were identified: religious (the Hajj and Prayagraj Kumbh), sporting (the Olympic and Paralympic Games, the Federation Internationale Football Association World Cup, and the Micronesian Games), and cultural (the Festival of Pacific Arts) events. Seven studies described surveillance systems implemented at mass gathering events and one study described and evaluated an enhanced surveillance system that was implemented for an event. Four studies reported the implementation of a surveillance system: 2 studies described the enhancement of the system that was implemented for an event; 1 reported a pilot implementation of a surveillance system; and 1 reported an evaluation of an enhanced system. The types of systems investigated were 2 syndromic, 1 participatory, 1 syndromic and event-based, 1 indicator-based and event-based, and 1 event-based surveillance system. Five studies reported timeliness as an outcome generated after implementing or enhancing the system without measuring its effectiveness. Only one study followed the Centres for Disease Control guidelines for evaluating public health surveillance systems and outcomes of enhanced systems based on the systems' attributes, in order to measure their effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS Based on the review of the research literature and the analysis of the included studies, this study found no evidence of the effectiveness of public health digital surveillance systems for infectious disease prevention and control at mass gatherings.