Toward a Common Ground for Defining Digital Health Interventions, Mapping Digital Health Frameworks to PICOTS-ComTeC: An ISPOR Special Interest Group Report.
Annette Champion, Anita Burrell, Anke-Peggy Holtorf, Rossella Di Bidino, Jagadeswara Rao Earla, Artem T Boltyenkov, Masami Tabata-Kelly, Carl Asche, Brian Seal, Zsombor Zrubka
{"title":"Toward a Common Ground for Defining Digital Health Interventions, Mapping Digital Health Frameworks to PICOTS-ComTeC: An ISPOR Special Interest Group Report.","authors":"Annette Champion, Anita Burrell, Anke-Peggy Holtorf, Rossella Di Bidino, Jagadeswara Rao Earla, Artem T Boltyenkov, Masami Tabata-Kelly, Carl Asche, Brian Seal, Zsombor Zrubka","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2025.07.022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Digital health interventions (DHIs) should be defined in a comparable, structured manner to facilitate research informing clinical and financial decisions. The Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes, Timing, Setting, Communication, Technology, Context (PICOTS-ComTeC) framework was developed to define patient-facing DHIs for health economics and outcomes research. Our objective was to compare PICOTS-ComTeC with established DHI frameworks and guidelines to determine the degree of overlap, additional value of PICOTS-ComTeC, and how the frameworks might be used together.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An expert group selected comparator frameworks. Reviewer pairs extracted information and mapped DHI definitions to 9 domains and 32 subcategories of PICOTS-ComTeC. A third reviewer checked for consistency across frameworks and missing data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A diverse group of 16 frameworks (9 international, regarding DHI classification, quality, labeling, and reporting; 6 national DHI health technology assessment and payer; 1 international health economic reporting) were compared with PICOTS-ComTeC. Across all frameworks, 81% (116/144) of PICOTS-ComTeC domains matched (range 44%-100%). The mean number of domain matches for a framework was 7.3. Comparator frameworks matched 48% (247/512) of PICOTS-ComTeC subcategories (range 16%-81%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The degree to which PICOTS-ComTeC is congruous with items in diverse DHI frameworks suggests that PICOTS-ComTeC represents a common ground for defining patient-facing DHIs for research, reporting, and assessment purposes, thereby improving patient care by accelerating adoption of effective DHIs. PICOTS-ComTeC contains items not uniformly present in comparator frameworks. PICOTS-ComTeC can be used to define patient-facing DHIs by adding missing PICOTS-ComTeC items to comparator frameworks or using information from comparator frameworks to describe PICOTS-ComTeC items.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2025.07.022","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: Digital health interventions (DHIs) should be defined in a comparable, structured manner to facilitate research informing clinical and financial decisions. The Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes, Timing, Setting, Communication, Technology, Context (PICOTS-ComTeC) framework was developed to define patient-facing DHIs for health economics and outcomes research. Our objective was to compare PICOTS-ComTeC with established DHI frameworks and guidelines to determine the degree of overlap, additional value of PICOTS-ComTeC, and how the frameworks might be used together.
Methods: An expert group selected comparator frameworks. Reviewer pairs extracted information and mapped DHI definitions to 9 domains and 32 subcategories of PICOTS-ComTeC. A third reviewer checked for consistency across frameworks and missing data.
Results: A diverse group of 16 frameworks (9 international, regarding DHI classification, quality, labeling, and reporting; 6 national DHI health technology assessment and payer; 1 international health economic reporting) were compared with PICOTS-ComTeC. Across all frameworks, 81% (116/144) of PICOTS-ComTeC domains matched (range 44%-100%). The mean number of domain matches for a framework was 7.3. Comparator frameworks matched 48% (247/512) of PICOTS-ComTeC subcategories (range 16%-81%).
Conclusions: The degree to which PICOTS-ComTeC is congruous with items in diverse DHI frameworks suggests that PICOTS-ComTeC represents a common ground for defining patient-facing DHIs for research, reporting, and assessment purposes, thereby improving patient care by accelerating adoption of effective DHIs. PICOTS-ComTeC contains items not uniformly present in comparator frameworks. PICOTS-ComTeC can be used to define patient-facing DHIs by adding missing PICOTS-ComTeC items to comparator frameworks or using information from comparator frameworks to describe PICOTS-ComTeC items.
期刊介绍：
Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
