@inproceedings{KernebeckRedaelliKrameretal.2019, author = {Kernebeck, Sven and Redaelli, Marcus and Kramer, Ursula and Vollmar, Horst Christian}, title = {Wie sollen digitale Gesundheitsanwendungen durch die Versorgungsforschung evaluiert werden?}, series = {18. Deutscher Kongress f{\"u}r Versorgungsforschung (DKVF). Berlin, 09.-11.10.2019}, booktitle = {18. Deutscher Kongress f{\"u}r Versorgungsforschung (DKVF). Berlin, 09.-11.10.2019}, doi = {10.3205/19dkvf029}, year = {2019}, language = {de} } @inproceedings{KernebeckBusseKrameretal.2020, author = {Kernebeck, Sven and Busse, Theresa Sophie and Kramer, Ursula and Redaelli, Marcus and Ehlers, Jan Peter and Vollmar, Horst Christian}, title = {Pandemie-Management und Digital Health - Merkmale und Qualit{\"a}t von Smartphone-Apps im Kontext der COVID-19 Pandemie}, series = {19. Deutscher Kongress f{\"u}r Versorgungsforschung, September 2020, online}, booktitle = {19. Deutscher Kongress f{\"u}r Versorgungsforschung, September 2020, online}, doi = {10.3205/20dkvf036}, year = {2020}, language = {de} } @inproceedings{KernebeckRedaelliKrameretal.2020, author = {Kernebeck, Sven and Redaelli, Marcus. and Kramer, Ursula and Vollmar, Horst Christian}, title = {Frameworks und Reporting Guidelines und Digital Health - Merkmale und Anwendungsm{\"o}glichkeiten verf{\"u}gbarer Frameworks und Reporting Guidelines f{\"u}r Studien zu Gesundheits- und Medizin-Apps}, series = {19. Deutscher Kongress f{\"u}r Versorgungsforschung, 30.09. - 01.10.2020, digital}, booktitle = {19. Deutscher Kongress f{\"u}r Versorgungsforschung, 30.09. - 01.10.2020, digital}, doi = {10.3205/20dkvf286}, year = {2020}, language = {de} } @incollection{KernebeckVollmar2021, author = {Kernebeck, Sven and Vollmar, Horst Christian}, title = {Qualit{\"a}t von Gesundheits- und Fitnessapps}, series = {Telemedizin und eHealth}, booktitle = {Telemedizin und eHealth}, isbn = {978-3-437-23545-0}, year = {2021}, language = {de} } @article{KernebeckScheibeSinhaetal.2022, author = {Kernebeck, Sven and Scheibe, Madlen and Sinha, Monika and Fischer, Florian and Knapp, Andreas and Timpel, Patrick and Harst, Lorenz and Reininghaus, Ulrich and Vollmar, Horst Christian}, title = {Digitale Gesundheitsinterventionen entwickeln, evaluieren und implementieren Teil II - Diskussionspapier der Arbeitsgruppe Digital Health des Deutschen Netzwerk Versorgungsforschung (DNVF)}, series = {Das Gesundheitswesen}, volume = {85}, journal = {Das Gesundheitswesen}, issn = {0941-3790}, doi = {10.1055/a-1915-4371}, pages = {65 -- 70}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Abstract The methodological challenges of evaluating digital interventions (DI) for health services research are omnipresent. The Digital Health Working Group of the German Network for Health Services Research (DNVF) presented and discussed these challenges in a two-part discussion paper. The first part addressed challenges in definition, development and evaluation of DI. In this paper, which represents the second part, the definition of outcomes, reporting of results, synthesis of evidence, and implementation are addressed as methodological challenges of DI. Potential solutions are presented and the need to address these challenges in future research are discussed.}, language = {de} } @incollection{KernebeckBusseVollmar2022, author = {Kernebeck, Sven and Busse, Theresa Sophie and Vollmar, Horst Christian}, title = {E-Health-{\"O}konomie II, Evaluation und Implementierung}, series = {E-Health-{\"O}konomie II, Evaluation und Implementierung}, booktitle = {E-Health-{\"O}konomie II, Evaluation und Implementierung}, isbn = {9783658356903}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-658-35691-0_4}, pages = {47 -- 69}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Eine intransparente, unvollst{\"a}ndige und unpr{\"a}zise Berichtserstattung von Forschungsergebnissen ist ein best{\"a}ndiges Problem in der Bio-Medizinischen Forschung. Dies f{\"u}hrt zu einer eingeschr{\"a}nkten Nachvollziehbarkeit von Forschungsergebnissen und schr{\"a}nkt die {\"U}bertragbarkeit der Ergebnisse deutlich ein. Auch bei Studien zu digitalen Interventionen im Bereich Electronic-Health (E-Health) ist die intransparente, unvollst{\"a}ndige und unpr{\"a}zise Berichtserstattung von Forschungsergebnissen zunehmend in der Diskussion. Dieser Beitrag verfolgt drei wesentliche Ziele: Es wird dargestellt, warum ein qualitativ hochwertiges Reporting von Studienergebnissen zu digitalen Interventionen von hoher Relevanz ist. Auf dieser Basis werden ausgew{\"a}hlte Reporting Guidelines und Frameworks beschrieben, die f{\"u}r das Berichten von Studienergebnissen zu digitalen Interventionen entwickelt wurden. Zudem werden weitere Elemente beschrieben, die die Berichterstattung unterst{\"u}tzen k{\"o}nnen, wie etwa ein Evidenzkonzept und allgemeine Entwicklungsmodelle digitaler Interventionen.}, language = {de} } @article{BusseJuxLaseretal.2023, author = {Busse, Theresa Sophie and Jux, Chantal and Laser, Johannes and Rasche, Peter and Vollmar, Horst Christian and Ehlers, Jan P and Kernebeck, Sven}, title = {Involving Health Care Professionals in the Development of Electronic Health Records: Scoping Review}, series = {JMIR Human Factors}, volume = {10}, journal = {JMIR Human Factors}, doi = {10.25974/fhms-17305}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:hbz:836-opus-173050}, pages = {e45598}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Electronic health records (EHRs) are a promising approach to document and map (complex) health information gathered in health care worldwide. However, possible unintended consequences during use, which can occur owing to low usability or the lack of adaption to existing workflows (eg, high cognitive load), may pose a challenge. To prevent this, the involvement of users in the development of EHRs is crucial and growing. Overall, involvement is designed to be very multifaceted, for example, in terms of the timing, frequency, or even methods used to capture user preferences. Setting, users and their needs, and the context and practice of health care must be considered in the design and subsequent implementation of EHRs. Many different approaches to user involvement exist, each requiring a variety of methodological choices. The aim of the study was to provide an overview of the existing forms of user involvement and the circumstances they need and to provide support for the planning of new involvement processes. We conducted a scoping review to provide a database for future projects on which design of inclusion is worthwhile and to show the diversity of reporting. Using a very broad search string, we searched the PubMed, CINAHL, and Scopus databases. In addition, we searched Google Scholar. Hits were screened according to scoping review methodology and then examined, focusing on methods and materials, participants, frequency and design of the development, and competencies of the researchers involved. In total, 70 articles were included in the final analysis. There was a wide range of methods of involvement. Physicians and nurses were the most frequently included groups and, in most cases, were involved only once in the process. The approach of involvement (eg, co-design) was not specified in most of the studies (44/70, 63\%). Further qualitative deficiencies in the reporting were evident in the presentation of the competences of members of the research and development teams. Think-aloud sessions, interviews, and prototypes were frequently used. This review provides insights into the diversity of health care professionals' involvement in the development of EHRs. It provides an overview of the different approaches in various fields of health care. However, it also shows the necessity of considering quality standards in the development of EHRs together with future users and the need for reporting this in future studies.}, language = {de} }