Patient and physician perspectives on the use and outcome measures of mHealth apps: Exploratory survey and focus group study.

Objective: Factors that physicians and patients consider when making decisions about using or recommending health apps are not well understood. We explored these factors to better assess how to support such decision making. Methods: We conducted an exploratory cross-sectional study in Ontario using qualitative focus groups and quantitative surveys. 133 physicians and 94 community dwelling adults completed online surveys and we held two focus groups of nine community dwelling participants who had cardiovascular risk factors and an interest in using mHealth apps. Quantitative survey data was analyzed descriptively. Focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim prior to inductive thematic content analysis. We integrated the results from the surveys and focus groups to understand factors that influence physicians' and patients' selection and use of such apps. Results: Physicians recommend apps to patients but the level of evidence they prefer to use to guide selection did not align with what they were currently using. Patients trusted recommendations and reviews from medical organizations and healthcare professionals when selecting apps and were motivated to continue using apps when they supported goal setting and tracking, data sharing, decision making, and empowerment. Conclusions: The findings highlight the significance of evaluating mHealth apps based on metrics that patients and physicians value beyond usage and clinical outcome data. Patients engage with apps that support them in confidently managing their health. Increased training and awareness of apps and creating a more rigorous evidence base showing the value of apps to supporting health goals will support greater adoption and acceptance of mHealth apps.

Correction: Computer-Aided Detection for Breast Cancer Screening in Clinical Settings: Scoping Review.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/12660.].

Computer-Aided Detection for Breast Cancer Screening in Clinical Settings: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: With the growth of machine learning applications, the practice of medicine is evolving. Computer-aided detection (CAD) is a software technology that has become widespread in radiology practices, particularly in breast cancer screening for improving detection rates at earlier stages. Many studies have investigated the diagnostic accuracy of CAD, but its implementation in clinical settings has been largely overlooked. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this scoping review was to summarize recent literature on the adoption and implementation of CAD during breast cancer screening by radiologists and to describe barriers and facilitators for CAD use. METHODS: The MEDLINE database was searched for English, peer-reviewed articles that described CAD implementation, including barriers or facilitators, in breast cancer screening and were published between January 2010 and March 2018. Articles describing the diagnostic accuracy of CAD for breast cancer detection were excluded. The search returned 526 citations, which were reviewed in duplicate through abstract and full-text screening. Reference lists and cited references in the included studies were reviewed. RESULTS: A total of nine articles met the inclusion criteria. The included articles showed that there is a tradeoff between the facilitators and barriers for CAD use. Facilitators for CAD use were improved breast cancer detection rates, increased profitability of breast imaging, and time saved by replacing double reading. Identified barriers were less favorable perceptions of CAD compared to double reading by radiologists, an increase in recall rates of patients for further testing, increased costs, and unclear effect on patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There is a gap in the literature between CAD's well-established diagnostic accuracy and its implementation and use by radiologists. Generally, the perceptions of radiologists have not been considered and details of implementation approaches for adoption of CAD have not been reported. The cost-effectiveness of CAD has not been well established for breast cancer screening in various populations. Further research is needed on how to best facilitate CAD in radiology practices in order to optimize patient outcomes, and the views of radiologists need to be better considered when advancing CAD use.