e.g. mhealth
Search Results (1 to 10 of 84 Results)
Download search results: CSV END BibTex RIS
Skip search results from other journals and go to results- 39 Journal of Medical Internet Research
- 9 JMIR Research Protocols
- 8 JMIR mHealth and uHealth
- 6 JMIR Medical Informatics
- 5 JMIR Mental Health
- 4 Interactive Journal of Medical Research
- 3 JMIR Pediatrics and Parenting
- 2 JMIR Aging
- 2 JMIR Medical Education
- 2 JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
- 1 JMIR Cancer
- 1 JMIR Dermatology
- 1 JMIR Human Factors
- 1 JMIR Nursing
- 0 Medicine 2.0
- 0 iProceedings
- 0 JMIR Serious Games
- 0 JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies
- 0 JMIR Preprints
- 0 JMIR Bioinformatics and Biotechnology
- 0 JMIR Challenges
- 0 JMIR Diabetes
- 0 JMIR Biomedical Engineering
- 0 JMIR Data
- 0 JMIR Cardio
- 0 JMIR Formative Research
- 0 Journal of Participatory Medicine
- 0 JMIR Perioperative Medicine
- 0 JMIRx Med
- 0 JMIRx Bio
- 0 JMIR Infodemiology
- 0 Transfer Hub (manuscript eXchange)
- 0 JMIR AI
- 0 JMIR Neurotechnology
- 0 Asian/Pacific Island Nursing Journal
- 0 Online Journal of Public Health Informatics
- 0 JMIR XR and Spatial Computing (JMXR)
This review is reported according to PRISMA-Sc R (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews; Multimedia Appendix 1) guidelines [31].
An experienced research librarian helped to develop the search strategy, which included a combination of subject headings and keyword searches for the key concepts of “Social Media,” “Mental Health,” “Health Knowledge,” “Attitudes,” “Stigma,” and “Help Seeking Behavior.”
J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e68124
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) flowchart summarizing the results of the literature search and screening for eligibility.
Multimedia Appendix 3 provides information about the 68 prioritized studies.
J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e65443
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Design, Application, and Actionability of US Public Health Data Dashboards: Scoping Review
This study followed the PRISMA-Sc R (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews), which is the most up-to-date and advanced approach for conducting and reporting scoping reviews [25]. In the subsequent sections, we briefly describe the methodological processes implemented. Further details are available in the published protocol [26].
J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e65283
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
AI: artificial intelligence; PRISMA-Sc R: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews; Wo S: Web of Science.
The scoping review section of this study follows the PRISMA-Sc R (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines and reports the search strategy used for literature selection [30].
J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e71560
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Quality and Misinformation About Health Conditions in Online Peer Support Groups: Scoping Review
This scoping review was conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews [35-37] and followed the PRISMA-Sc R (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist for reporting [38]. The review protocol was registered in January 2024 on the Open Science Framework Registries [39].
J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e71140
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
This study was carried out in adherence to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (Multimedia Appendix 1) [12].
A thorough literature search was performed across 6 databases (Pub Med, Web of Science, Pro Quest, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane) up to December 29, 2024, to locate studies investigating the use of ML in predicting and diagnosing ARDS.
J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e66615
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
The review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines (Multimedia Appendix 1).
Ethics approval was not required for this systematic review by the authors’ institutional review board, as it exclusively analyzed existing published data.
Before data collection, we formulated the research questions using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, and Study Design framework.
J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e73520
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Digital Mental Health Interventions for Young People Aged 16-25 Years: Scoping Review
Reporting was guided by the PRISMA-Sc R (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist (Multimedia Appendix 2).
Search terms used to identify studies across 6 key databases.
Articles published in English only were considered for inclusion. The selection criteria are presented in Textbox 1.
J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e72892
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
According to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses)(Checklist 1) [43] flow diagram, we searched for apps and excluded or included them based on their title, icon, and description in the app store.
The coding process categorized key aspects from all apps, names, and website links from each web store were manually transferred into Excel spreadsheets.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2025;13:e56466
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
We conducted a systematic review of the literature according to the Cochrane Methods Group and in compliance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines for its reporting (Multimedia Appendix 1) [16,17]. We registered the study protocol with the PROSPERO Systematic Review Registry (ID: CRD42022333513) [18] and have also published it [19].
The synthesis questions were (1) What are the effective strategies to implement e PROMs in PHC?
J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e63639
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS