Mobile health for first nations populations:Systematic review

• Published in: JMIR mHealth and uHealth
• Main Authors: Hobson, Georgina R., Caffery, Liam J., Neuhaus, Maike, Langbecker, Danette H.
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: 2019
• Subjects: Canada; New Zealand; Briggs; First Nations
• Online Access: https://researchprofiles.canberra.edu.au/en/publications/7e27b0c2-b99c-4bfa-baf2-343979cba6ec; https://doi.org/10.2196/14877; https://researchsystem.canberra.edu.au/ws/files/94590138/mhealth-2019-10-e14877.pdf; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85073075143&partnerID=8YFLogxK

Background: The ubiquitous presence and functionality of mobile devices offers the potential for mobile health (mHealth) to create equitable health opportunities. While mHealth is used among First Nations populations to respond to health challenges, the characteristics, uptake, and effectiveness of these interventions are unclear. Objective: This review aimed to identify the characteristics of mHealth interventions (eg, study locations, health topic, and modality) evaluated with First Nations populations and to summarize the outcomes reported for intervention use, user perspectives including cultural responsiveness, and clinical effectiveness. In addition, the review sought to identify the presence of First Nations expertise in the design and evaluation of mHealth interventions with First Nations populations. Methods: The methods of this systematic review were detailed in a registered protocol with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO, CRD42019123276). Systematic searches of peer-reviewed, scientific papers were conducted across 7 databases in October 2018. Eligible studies had a primary focus on mHealth interventions with experimental or quasi-experimental design to respond to a health challenge with First Nations people from Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States. Two authors independently screened records for eligibility and assessed risk of bias using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklists. Data were synthesized narratively owing to the mix of study designs, interventions, and outcomes. The review was reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Results: Searches yielded 1053 unique records, after review and screening, 13 studies (5 randomized controlled trials and 8 quasi-experimental designs) were included in the final analysis. Studies were conducted in Australia (n=9), the United States (n=2), and New Zealand (n=2). The most common health challenge addressed was mental health and suicide ...