JMIR J Med Internet Res Journal of Medical Internet Research 1438-8871 JMIR Publications Toronto, Canada v26i1e47882 39226549 10.2196/47882 Viewpoint Viewpoint The Digital Platform and Its Emerging Role in Decentralized Clinical Trials Leung Tiffany Yunis Reem Blasimme Alessandro Waalen Jill Copland Rachel R BSc 1
MEMO Research School of Medicine University of Dundee Ninewells Hospital and Medical School Dundee, DD1 9SY United Kingdom 44 1382388380 rcopland001@dundee.ac.uk
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9618-1584 Hanke Sten MSc, PhD 2 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3833-4252 Rogers Amy MBChB, MD 1 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5207-7032 Mpaltadoros Lampros MSc 3 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8652-7628 Lazarou Ioulietta PhD 3 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5113-8366 Zeltsi Alexandra MSc 3 https://orcid.org/0009-0004-5262-6328 Nikolopoulos Spiros PhD 3 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1367-5133 MacDonald Thomas M BSc, MBChB, MD 1 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5189-6669 Mackenzie Isla S MBChB, PhD 1 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3680-7127 MEMO Research School of Medicine University of Dundee Dundee United Kingdom eHealth FH Joanneum Graz Austria Information Technologies Institute Centre for Research & Technology Hellas Thessaloniki Greece Corresponding Author: Rachel R Copland rcopland001@dundee.ac.uk 2024 3 9 2024 26 e47882 6 4 2023 21 8 2023 11 10 2023 9 7 2024 ©Rachel R Copland, Sten Hanke, Amy Rogers, Lampros Mpaltadoros, Ioulietta Lazarou, Alexandra Zeltsi, Spiros Nikolopoulos, Thomas M MacDonald, Isla S Mackenzie. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 03.09.2024. 2024

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (ISSN 1438-8871), is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

Decentralized clinical trials (DCTs) are becoming increasingly popular. Digital clinical trial platforms are software environments where users complete designated clinical trial tasks, providing investigators and trial participants with efficient tools to support trial activities and streamline trial processes. In particular, digital platforms with a modular architecture lend themselves to DCTs, where individual trial activities can correspond to specific platform modules. While design features can allow users to customize their platform experience, the real strengths of digital platforms for DCTs are enabling centralized data capture and remote monitoring of trial participants and in using digital technologies to streamline workflows and improve trial management. When selecting a platform for use in a DCT, sponsors and investigators must consider the specific trial requirements. All digital platforms are limited in their functionality and technical capabilities. Integrating additional functional modules into a central platform may solve these challenges, but few commercial platforms are open to integrating third-party components. The lack of common data standardization protocols for clinical trials will likely limit the development of one-size-fits-all digital platforms for DCTs. This viewpoint summarizes the current role of digital platforms in supporting decentralized trial activities, including a discussion of the potential benefits and challenges of digital platforms for investigators and participants. We will highlight the role of the digital platform in the development of DCTs and emphasize where existing technology is functionally limiting. Finally, we will discuss the concept of the ideal fully integrated and unified DCT and the obstacles developers must address before it can be realized.

 decentralized clinical trials digital platform digitalization clinical trials mobile phone Introduction

In the last 2 decades, advances in digital health have given rise to clinical trial designs that are expected to disrupt the conventional clinical trial model [1-10]. Conventional clinical trials often depend on frequent in-person site visits, and are therefore limited to individuals who can easily access trial sites. The decentralized clinical trial (DCT), however, allows individuals to take part in research regardless of their geographical proximity to the trial site [11,12]. Moving trial activities away from sites and into participant homes or other local settings can also make trials less burdensome for participants [13].

DCTs are often, but not exclusively, facilitated by technology. Participants can be recruited through web-based advertising campaigns, receive study medications directly to their homes, self-report outcomes through smartphone apps, attend trial visits at home through videoconferencing software, and be monitored remotely with interconnected wearable devices [14-23]. Sponsors increasingly use these technologies as the pharmaceutical industry shifts toward using more decentralized or hybrid [24] methods [1,2]. To fully harness the benefits of this shift toward decentralization, we recommend the adoption of unified, integrated, and DCT-specific digital platforms.

A widely agreed definition of digital platforms does not yet exist; in this paper, we define them as software environments that facilitate the completion of clinical trial tasks. Digital platforms, hosted locally or on remote (cloud-based) servers, can also facilitate centralized data monitoring and oversight of trial activity, and typically adopt a modular architecture. A unified platform is one where disparate systems and modules centralize (or unify) to create a seamless user interface by linking systems to allow uninterrupted data flow. DCTs often incorporate several modes of data collection (eg, devices, electronic participant reported outcomes) from disparate sources. Unifying these data in a single platform avoids data sprawl while providing the opportunity for richer data insights and streamlined workflows [25,26]. The Eureka digital platform, for example, was developed by the University of California and has been used in several DCTs. The Eureka platform allows participants to consent, upload data, and attend remote trial visits. Meanwhile, trial staff can access real-time study progress data, generate reports, and collect analysis-ready data sets [27]. Eureka permits the customization of user interfaces with a granular role-based permissions system. Platforms like Eureka can be tailored to multiple users, including trial participants, researchers, sponsors, and third-party vendors, and are accessible on any suitable internet-connected device.

Although the use of digital platforms in DCTs is relatively common [27-34], existing platforms are not without limitations. Lack of interoperability and unclear data standardization protocols are known challenges to building unified systems [35-37]. Many proprietary digital platforms offer modules to support common DCT trial activities such as electronic data capture (EDC), drug dispensing, or remote visits. However, not all planned DCT activities may be available in a single proprietary system. To overcome this limitation, 1 option would be to integrate a third-party software solution that provides the necessary functionality often not permitted on proprietary systems. Even where third-party integration is allowed, subsequent software updates may be problematic [38]. Lack of data standardization leads to platforms and modules lacking interoperability, and custom implementations increase build complexity, extending timelines, and adding to costs.

With hybrid and decentralized study designs becoming more popular, the demand for innovative systems to support these trials is likely to grow; this will result in technology partners becoming important stakeholders in the success of DCTs, particularly for those studies requiring custom builds. The trend toward decentralization, however, has highlighted discordance between trialists and technology partners. Where technology partners specialize in full-stack development and user experience design, they are not experts on clinical trials. Likewise, trialists are adept at the intricacies of the clinical trial and DCT landscape, but they may harbor unrealistic expectations of system capabilities. This lack of shared understanding between stakeholders slows progress [39-41], and literature discussing platforms from both technical and clinical perspectives is scarce. We have attempted to bridge this gap in this viewpoint. We examine how digital platforms and DCTs have developed and highlight the advantages of a digital platform approach. We also discuss where user engagement in platform design can strengthen the DCT model. Finally, we demonstrate the key challenges of deploying a unified, modular, and fully-integrated platform in terms of technical limitations and data standardization.

 Digital Platforms: Then and Now

Early digital solutions for clinical trials took many forms, including EDC programs and software that helped streamline trial management. The INVEST trial compared treatment strategies for the treatment of hypertension in individuals with coronary artery disease [42,43]. The trial began in 1997 and was conducted using an internet-based software tool akin to a modern randomization and trial supply management system. Hosted on a Netscape Enterprise Server, the tool incorporated a database for real-time collection, verification, and validation of participant data at study visits. In the same year, Schoichet et al [44] described a communications network set up initially for the COMET trial, which investigated the efficacy of a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treatment. The network included tools for data transfer, randomization and trial supply management activities, communications protocols, and an information access system for monitoring the trial status. The infrastructure was developed from preexisting local area networks, and frame relays were established between the participating organizations. An internal interactive voice response system was deployed to conduct and monitor tasks relating to drug supply management, collecting data in real-time. To monitor study activities, a platform was built on Lotus Notes (Lotus Development Corporation) with separate modules for enrollment of participants, trial monitoring, adverse event reporting, and tracking of case report forms.

Many modern platform interfaces, derived from early EDC systems, include participant-facing electronic diaries and web-based questionnaires. These have been used successfully in several early DCTs [45-47], and remain popular [32,48,49]. EDC platforms later expanded their capabilities beyond remote data capture to include other DCT elements, such as electronic consenting and telemedicine. Various DCTs have used the REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture; Vanderbilt University) [50,51] electronic data capture platform to allow participants to upload trial data [52-54]. Other DCTs have used ResearchKit (Apple Inc.) [55], an open-source framework, to create participant platforms for users to consent, upload data, and view study results through a study-specific app [16,56,57].

There are several technology vendors offering ready-to-deploy, customizable, and often modular, platforms for DCTs. Companies such as IQVIA [58]; Medable [59]; Castor [60]; THREAD [61]; ObvioHealth [62]; Science37 [63]; Cognizant [64]; and AiCure [65], among others, offer digital platforms. For example, the RADIAL trial conducted by Trials@Home [66] is supported by eClinicalHealth’s Clinpal [67] digital platform. While conducting a recent systematic review of methods used to conduct DCTs, we found that, of 45 included trials, 31 managed their trials using a digital platform of some kind [24].

 Why Use Digital Platforms for DCTs?

The benefits of using digital platforms for DCTs extend to both participants and researchers. Digital platforms allow participants to be monitored remotely, which is associated with improved self-management of conditions and better clinical outcomes for participants [68-70]. Meanwhile, remote monitoring gives researchers greater insight into the day-to-day variability of disease activity and its wider impact [71,72]. Platforms with electronic participant reported outcome modules can increase participant satisfaction, improve data quality, reduce costs, and improve response rates [73-75]. There are also benefits associated with participants using their own devices to access study platforms. Directly uploading one’s information to the platform (ie, active data collection) offers participants greater flexibility and enables “on the go” or real-time reporting. On the other hand, data collected passively through devices, such as geolocation or screen interactions, provide researchers with greater insight into real-world behavior. The Brighten (Bridging Research Innovations for Greater Health in Technology, Emotion, and Neuroscience) DCTs, for example, actively and passively collected data to better understand the behaviors of participants with depression [76]. This combination of active and passive data collection could allow researchers to better monitor changes in behavior and, in theory, intervene sooner. DCTs with little to no participant-study team interaction may be experienced as disengaging by participants, but platform technologies can address these challenges. Push notifications, alerts, and reminders received through devices, phones, or personal computers have been cited as facilitators of engagement [77], and research has shown how these features have encouraged participants to complete study tasks and promote the use of study apps [78,79]. Research increasingly shows participants value having access to their own data [41,80], and displaying meaningful insights through participant dashboards could improve participant satisfaction. Another strategy for increasing engagement and promoting product longevity that is frequently adopted in commercial settings is gamification. Gamification incorporates game design elements in nongame contexts [81] to encourage reward-seeking behavior through incentives, such as unlocking new levels, receiving badges, or collecting points [82]. This strategy of promoting engagement has proved effective in several trials [83-88] and could be used to enhance both trial and platform engagement.

Digital platforms can be integrated with videoconferencing software, which allows participants to attend trial visits remotely [49,89,90]. Participant satisfaction with video visits is generally high, even when visits are completed on smartphones [91]. For instance, a platform could offer a web-based booking system, giving participants flexibility when scheduling follow-up visits. Further, integrating calendar application programming interfaces with the platform would allow visits to be added to the participant’s existing email or device calendars, which could be accompanied by pop-ups or reminders, potentially reducing missed or forgotten appointments. A combination of the tools mentioned above could generate a platform that promotes participant engagement with the trial while also allowing investigators to supervise trial progress and participant safety.

Conducting DCTs through digital platforms can also result in improved data integrity; this can be accomplished through platforms with data visualization dashboards, data tables, activity and audit logs, and real-time error flags, with unauthorized data edits restricted through access controls. Currently, most data visualizations and dashboards are implemented with web access in JavaScript or similar tools. More modern visualizations incorporate business intelligence (BI) approaches where different data sources can be combined and structured for quick visualization. BI tools can further help to find patterns and correlations between data. Data traceability can be achieved with rules-based sanity tests, semiautomated validation, and automated report generation [92]. Research increasingly supports the adoption of blockchain technology in clinical trials, with advocates suggesting that an immutable ledger using smart contracts would improve data integrity, accountability, and traceability [93-96]. For example, Liang et al [97], demonstrated a system whereby users controlled data access and protected privacy through blockchain technology and Intel software guard extensions. Data integrity and accountability were ensured by hashing protected personal health data and data access records and anchoring them to a long-lasting but secure ledger with platform dependencies. Building digital platforms on blockchain technology and other similar technological solutions warrants further exploration but could have significant implications for improving data integrity and security in DCTs.

 Anticipating Risks When Designing Platforms Overview

Maintaining digital security and compliance with local legislation and data standards are paramount to the success of DCTs, and digital platforms are not exempt from potential risks. While an unstable internet connection presents a source of weakness for data sharing, personal devices can also fall victim to malware or expose personal information if lost or stolen. As more trials embrace platform technologies, data security and governance risks will continue to grow [98]. Security and governance teams must, therefore, be established both at the Sponsor site and among all trial partners to scan for malware, apply patches to applications, and keep study personnel and participants informed on how to protect their data. As with conventional clinical trial approaches, DCTs are vulnerable to nonadherence and attrition. Learnings from mHealth studies show that users lose momentum with app use after a goal has been achieved and nothing new can be gained [99], which could have consequences for trials using digital platforms. Following best practice guidelines for DCTs, like choosing a research question of high perceived value [13] or offering flexibility in the DCT approach [100], may ameliorate some of these challenges, but research in this area is limited.

Finally, population demographics and individual preferences can impact how a user interacts with digital platforms, and anticipating these factors in advance can minimize later delays. For example, lack of digital literacy, inexperience with trial technology, insufficient digital infrastructure, and lack of confidence using devices are frequently cited reasons for withdrawal in app-based studies [101,102]. Embedding customization features into platforms may address this and encourage use, as has been demonstrated with mHealth applications [103-108]. Additionally, customization such as enlarged text functionality or text-to-speech embedded software would accommodate those with accessibility needs. Designing straightforward and simple user interfaces can avoid “overwhelm” and encourage regular use [99,109], and being able to access the platform on multiple devices allows participants to prioritize familiar devices. Age-related differences can influence how a user perceives the graphical user interface of the platform. Older adults perform better with classic, skeuomorphic interfaces (mimicking real-world objects), but younger adults may prefer the minimalism of flat design (clean and straightforward) [110]. Busy or cluttered platforms risk excluding individuals with dyslexia or visual impairments [111], potentially discouraging use [41,77], and improper use of color hues risks excluding color-blind individuals [112,113]. Further, research has shown that participants value simple interfaces [41,80] in digitally enabled DCTs. Additionally, users have preexisting expectations of platform functionality [114], (eg, “hamburger icons” denoting navigation menus), which should be considered in platform design. Typography, color, formatting, and layout can also influence user experience [115-118].

 The Challenge of Fully Integrated, Unified Digital Platforms

Many commercially available platform solutions are not yet open for integrating third-party components or are limited in their service provision and functionalities. Using existing components and already established solutions typically still results in a lack of interoperability, dependence on functionalities, and vendor lock-in. The future of digital platform technology, therefore, would look toward developing an end-to-end platform applying international standards where, if desired, users can integrate individual modules from different vendors.

Given the relative novelty of fully integrated, unified digital platforms for DCTs, specific interoperability standards for clinical trial platforms are not yet available. Nevertheless, commonly recommended standards are broadly applicable. We have summarized some of these standards in Table 1. The Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society [119] recommends interoperability standards in health care. These standards describe data sharing and offer recommendations regarding privacy and security. They define levels of interoperability, including technical and semantic. Future digital components used in DCTs should adapt and integrate these standards and recommendations for interoperability and modularity. As more data standardization processes become available, better ways to communicate and analyze data in trial platforms will become apparent [120].

Figure 1 provides a reference architecture of components typically comprising a DCT. Architectures provide an abstract view of systems and can be used to manage communications and decisions. Domain, application, and site requirements lead to domain reference architectures which can be further refined to application architectures. These, in turn, define the final implementation architecture. The architecture comprising a digital platform is technically complex, and a further layer of complexity is added when integrating modules from external providers. Developing such a platform would first require defined system requirements (functional and nonfunctional), user requirements (user point of view, user goals, and user input and output), and business requirements (sponsor point of view, scope of trial, and business objectives). Within our reference model, data exists in a common format and the use of preexisting standards guarantees interoperability, but this exhibits a best-case scenario. Lack of interoperability represents a significant hurdle to the development of unified digital platforms, and the lack of specific data standardization processes may prevent innovation in this technology from being explored. Moreover, given the proprietary nature of many of the available commercial platforms, specific literature on integrations, architectures, data standardization, and general deployment strategies is restricted or unavailable. Despite these challenges, the development of a fully-integrated digital platform with in-built customization and tailoring is likely to provide suppliers with a competitive advantage in the growing DCT landscape.

Existing data standardization processes and examples illustrating how these standards can be implemented in digital platform solutions.

Publisher Data standard Applicable use in digital platforms
HL7a FHIRb Profile released to store and transmit health data in a standardized, easy, and accessible format [121,122]. Digital platforms would benefit from using international standards for health data exchange partially already used in hospital information systems. HL2 version 3 promotes clinical document architecture which can be used to save clinical reports in a standardized form.
CDISCc PRMd Provides a standard for planning and designing a research protocol with focus on study characteristics such as study design, eligibility criteria, and requirements from ClinicalTrials.gov, WHOe, and EudraCT registries. PRM assists in automating case report form creation and EHRf configuration to support clinical research and data sharing.
CDISC CDASHg Establishes a standardized way to collect data consistently across studies and sponsors so that data collection formats and structures provide clear traceability of submission data into SDTMh, delivering more transparency to regulators and others conducting data review.
CDISC AdaMi Defines dataset and metadata standards that support efficient generation, replication, and review of clinical trial statistical analyses, and traceability among analyses results, analyses data, and data represented in the SDTM [123]. Required standard for data submission to the FDAj and Japan’s PMDAk.
GS1l GS1 Global Data Model Process automation in DCTsm. GS1 in health care is a global, voluntary group for all participants in the health care supply chain, which includes manufacturers, distributors, health care services, solution providers, regulators, and associations. A clinical trial electronic messaging standard implementation guide is provided [121].

aHL7: Health Level 7.

bFHIR: Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources.

cCDISC: Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium.

dPRM: Protocol Representation Model.

eWHO: World Health Organization.

fEHR: electronic health record.

gCDASH: Clinical Data Acquisition Standards Harmonization.

hSDTM: Study Data Tabulation Model.

iADaM: Analysis Data Model.

jFDA: United States Food and Drug Administration.

kPMDA: Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency.

lGS1: Global Standards 1.

mDCT: decentralized clinical trial.

A reference architecture for components typically involved in decentralized clinical trials for data sharing and storage between participants’ homes and study centers. Data exists in a common format with preexisting standards to guarantee interoperability and modularity. Figure adapted with permission from Trials@Home Deliverable 2.4 [124]. CDISC: Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium; FHIR: Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources; GCP: good clinical practice; GS1: Global Standards 1; HIS: hospital information system; HL7: Health Level 7; IHE: Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise; REST: representational state transfer; SOP: standard operating procedure; WHO: World Health Organization.

 Conclusions

The growing popularity of DCTs necessitates an increasing reliance on technology. We believe the benefits of such technologies will be best realized through unified digital platforms. Platform approaches have historically been used to support DCTs, and the technology underpinning these platforms continues to develop. Tools for promoting trial engagement, maintaining investigator oversight, and improving data integrity can all be facilitated through digital platforms, and careful design planning helps accommodate the various needs of platform users. Digital platforms will likely evolve into singular, unified platforms that integrate external modules to generate a fully customizable system. However, challenges with poor interoperability and lack of data standards must first be addressed. Regardless of the current state of digital platforms for DCTs, the relationship between technology and trial innovation is likely to strengthen. Therefore, developing and implementing new DCT tools and solutions that support all stakeholders will require clinical and technical expertise.

 Abbreviations DCT

decentralized clinical trial

 EDC

electronic data capture

 REDCap

Research Electronic Data Capture

The Trials@Home project has received funding from the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking (grant agreement 831458). This joint undertaking received support from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations. The research leading to these results was conducted as part of the Trials@Home consortium. This paper only reflects the personal views of the stated authors. No generative artificial intelligence was used in any portion of manuscript writing.

Manuscript conceptualization is credited to RC. RC and SH wrote the original draft of the manuscript. All authors were involved in reviewing and editing the final manuscript.

ISM reports research grants from Menarini, EMA, Sanofi, HDR UK, National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA), and Innovative Medicines Initiative; institutional consultancy income from AstraZeneca outside of the submitted work; personal income from AstraZeneca, Amgen, Amarin, Novartis and Novo Nordisk outside of the submitted work; and vice-chairmanship of a trial steering committee for a trial funded by Novo Nordisk. TMM reports grants from the British Heart Foundation, Menarini/Ipsen/Teijin, NIHR HTA, and MSD outside of the submitted work; personal income for consultancy from Novartis and AstraZeneca, and honorarium from Viatris outside of the submitted work; membership of independent data monitoring committees for Novo Nordisk and an NIHR trial; and is a trustee of the Scottish Heart Arterial Risk Prevention Society. AR reports unpaid membership of an NIHR trial steering committee. The remaining authors declare no competing interests.

 Marquis-Gravel G Roe MT Turakhia MP Boden W Temple R Sharma A Hirshberg B Slater P Craft N Stockbridge N McDowell B Waldstreicher J Bourla A Bansilal S Wong JL Meunier C Kassahun H Coran P Bataille L Patrick-Lake B Hirsch B Reites J Mehta R Muse ED Chandross KJ Silverstein J Silcox C Overhage JM Califf RM Peterson ED Technology-enabled clinical trials: transforming medical evidence generation Circulation 2019 140 17 1426 1436 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.040798 31634011 Rosa C Campbell ANC Miele GM Brunner M Winstanley EL Using e-technologies in clinical trials Contemp Clin Trials 2015 45 41 54 10.1016/j.cct.2015.07.007 26176884 S1551-7144(15)30044-6 PMC4648297 Steinhubl SR McGovern P Dylan J Topol EJ The digitised clinical trial Lancet 2017 390 10108 2135 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32741-1 29143747 S0140-6736(17)32741-1 Intelligent clinical trials: transforming through AI-enabled engagement Deloitte Centre for Health Solutions 2020 2024-05-14 https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/insights/us/articles/22934_intelligent-clinical-trials/DI_Intelligent-clinical-trials.pdf Dorsey ER Darwin KC Mohammed S Donohue S Tethal A Achey MA Ward S Caughey E Conley ED Eriksson N Ravina B Virtual research visits and direct-to-consumer genetic testing in Parkinson's disease Digit Health 2015 1 2055207615592998 10.1177/2055207615592998 29942542 10.1177_2055207615592998 PMC5999055 Dorsey ER Wagner JD Bull MT Rizzieri A Grischkan J Achey MA Sherer T Chowdhury S Meunier C Cappelletti L Rocker C Richard IH Schwarz H Kang G Ahmad SH Biemiller RA Biglan K Feasibility of virtual research visits in Fox Trial Finder J Parkinsons Dis 2015 5 3 505 515 10.3233/JPD-150549 26406130 JPD150549 PMC4923707 Hirsch IB Martinez J Dorsey ER Finken G Fleming A Gropp C Home P Kaufer D Papapetropoulos S Incorporating site-less clinical trials into drug development: a framework for action Clin Ther 2017 39 5 1064 1076 10.1016/j.clinthera.2017.03.018 28413148 S0149-2918(17)30200-X Jadhav S Virtual clinical trials: the future of patient engagement? Applied Clinical Trials 2016 2024-05-14 https://www.appli edclinicaltrialsonline.com/view/virtual-clinical-trials-future-patient-engagement Rutkove SB Qi K Shelton K Liss J Berisha V Shefner JM ALS longitudinal studies with frequent data collection at home: study design and baseline data Amyotroph Lateral Scler Frontotemporal Degener 2019 20 1-2 61 67 10.1080/21678421.2018.1541095 30486680 PMC6513689 Vogel MME Combs SE Kessel KA mHealth and application technology supporting clinical trials: today's limitations and future perspective of smartRCTs Front Oncol 2017 7 37 10.3389/fonc.2017.00037 28348978 PMC5346562 Rogers A Copland R Houston Pichardo S Harwood K Müller-Vössing C Naster P Rutgrink L Kohlhaas U van Veen E Aerts J Schnalzer B Reiter C Rehb R Glossary of terms and definitions used Trials@Home 2020 2024-05-14 https://trialsathome.com/glossary/ Decentralized clinical trials for drugs, biological products, and devices: guidance for industry, investigators, and other stakeholders Food and Drug Administration 2023 2024-05-14 https://www.fda.gov/media/167696/download Rogers A Mackenzie I Hawkins K Work Package 1 BEST Team of the Trials@Home Project First set of recommendations for RDCTs (to be implemented in the pan-EU pilot RDCT) Trials@Home 2020 2023-04-06 https://trialsathome.com/first-set-of -recommendations-for-rdcts-d1-1/ Steinhubl SR Waalen J Edwards AM Ariniello LM Mehta RR Ebner GS Carter C Baca-Motes K Felicione E Sarich T Topol EJ Effect of a home-based wearable continuous ECG monitoring patch on detection of undiagnosed atrial fibrillation: the mSToPS randomized clinical trial JAMA 2018 320 2 146 155 10.1001/jama.2018.8102 29998336 2687353 PMC6583518 Carpinella I Cattaneo D Bonora G Bowman T Martina L Montesano A Ferrarin M Wearable sensor-based biofeedback training for balance and gait in Parkinson disease: a pilot randomized controlled trial Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2017 98 4 622 630.e3 10.1016/j.apmr.2016.11.003 27965005 S0003-9993(16)31293-X Perez MV Mahaffey KW Hedlin H Rumsfeld JS Garcia A Ferris T Balasubramanian V Russo AM Rajmane A Cheung L Hung G Lee J Kowey P Talati N Nag D Gummidipundi SE Beatty A Hills MT Desai S Granger CB Desai M Turakhia MP Large-scale assessment of a smartwatch to identify atrial fibrillation N Engl J Med 2019 381 20 1909 1917 10.1056/NEJMoa1901183 31722151 PMC8112605 Bergenstal RM Peyrot M Dreon DM Aroda VR Bailey TS Brazg RL Frias JP Johnson ML Klonoff DC Kruger DF Ramtoola S Rosenstock J Serusclat P Weinstock RS Naik RG Shearer DM Zraick V Levy BL Implementation of basal-bolus therapy in type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial comparing bolus insulin delivery using an insulin patch with an insulin pen Diabetes Technol Ther 2019 21 5 273 285 10.1089/dia.2018.0298 31025878 PMC6532545 Wisk LE Nelson EB Magane KM Weitzman ER Clinical trial recruitment and retention of college students with type 1 diabetes via social media: an implementation case study J Diabetes Sci Technol 2019 13 3 445 456 10.1177/1932296819839503 31010315 PMC6501540 Bailey JV Pavlou M Copas A McCarthy O Carswell K Rait G Hart G Nazareth I Free C French R Murray E The Sexunzipped trial: optimizing the design of online randomized controlled trials J Med Internet Res 2013 15 12 e278 10.2196/jmir.2668 24334216 v15i12e278 PMC3868980 Parker JN Hunter AS Bauermeister JA Bonar EE Carrico A Stephenson R Comparing social media and in-person recruitment: lessons learned from recruiting substance-using, sexual and gender minority adolescents and young adults for a randomized control trial JMIR Public Health Surveill 2021 7 12 e31657 10.2196/31657 34855613 v7i12e31657 PMC8686481 Durkalski V Zhao W Dillon C Kim J A web-based clinical trial management system for a sham-controlled multicenter clinical trial in depression Clin Trials 2010 7 2 174 182 10.1177/1740774509358748 20083496 1740774509358748 Cramon P Rasmussen ÅK Bonnema SJ Bjorner JB Feldt-Rasmussen U Groenvold M Hegedüs L Watt T Development and implementation of PROgmatic: a clinical trial management system for pragmatic multi-centre trials, optimised for electronic data capture and patient-reported outcomes Clin Trials 2014 11 3 344 354 10.1177/1740774513517778 24519964 1740774513517778 Gupta A Calfas KJ Marshall SJ Robinson TN Rock CL Huang JS Epstein-Corbin M Servetas C Donohue M Norman G Raab F Merchant G Fowler JH Griswold WG Fogg BJ Patrick K Clinical trial management of participant recruitment, enrollment, engagement, and retention in the SMART study using a marketing and information technology (MARKIT) model Contemp Clin Trials 2015 42 185 195 10.1016/j.cct.2015.04.002 25866383 S1551-7144(15)00073-7 PMC4450113 Rogers A De Paoli G Subbarayan S Copland R Harwood K Coyle J Mitchell L MacDonald TM Mackenzie IS A systematic review of methods used to conduct decentralised clinical trials Br J Clin Pharmacol 2022 88 6 2843 2862 10.1111/bcp.15205 34961991 PMC9306873 Vesset D Olofson CW Unified data cloud for simplicity and intelligence to drive better business outcomes International Data Corporation 2022 2024-05-14 https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/idc_whitepaper_unified_data_cloud_for_simplicity _and_intelligence.pdf Kashyap D Streamlining clinical trials: the impact of unified management platforms on drug development Cloudbyz 2023 2024-05-14 https://www.cloudbyz.com/resources/clinical-operations/streamlining-clinical-trials-the-impact-of-unified- management-platforms-on-drug-development/ Peyser ND Marcus GM Beatty AL Olgin JE Pletcher MJ Digital platforms for clinical trials: the Eureka experience Contemp Clin Trials 2022 115 106710 10.1016/j.cct.2022.106710 35183763 S1551-7144(22)00036-2 van Dam J Omondi Onyango K Midamba B Groosman N Hooper N Spector J Pillai GC Ogutu B Open-source mobile digital platform for clinical trial data collection in low-resource settings BMJ Innov 2017 3 1 26 31 10.1136/bmjinnov-2016-000164 28250964 bmjinnov-2016-000164 PMC5293854 Dockendorf MF Hansen BJ Bateman KP Moyer M Shah JK Shipley LA Digitally enabled, patient-centric clinical trials: shifting the drug development paradigm Clin Transl Sci 2021 14 2 445 459 10.1111/cts.12910 33048475 PMC7993267 Doyle J Murphy E Gavin S Pascale A Deparis S Tommasi P Smith S Hannigan C Smitt MS van Leeuwen C Lastra J Galvin M McAleer P Tompkins L Jacobs A Marques MM Maestro JM Boyle G Dinsmore J A digital platform to support self-management of multiple chronic conditions (ProACT): findings in relation to engagement during a one-year proof-of-concept trial J Med Internet Res 2021 23 12 e22672 10.2196/22672 34914612 v23i12e22672 PMC8717138 Spertus JA Birmingham MC Nassif M Damaraju CV Abbate A Butler J Lanfear DE Lingvay I Kosiborod MN Januzzi JL The SGLT2 inhibitor canagliflozin in heart failure: the CHIEF-HF remote, patient-centered randomized trial Nat Med 2022 28 4 809 813 10.1038/s41591-022-01703-8 35228753 10.1038/s41591-022-01703-8 PMC9018422 Tempini N Teira D Is the genie out of the bottle? Digital platforms and the future of clinical trials Econ Soc 2019 48 1 77 106 10.1080/03085147.2018.1547496 Triebell E Enhancing decentralized clinical trials through advanced digital platforms Health Cloud Solutions 2022 2023-04-06 https://healthcloudsolutions.org/enhancing-decentralized-clinical-trials-through-advanced-digital-platforms Harrington M Identifying integrated digital platforms designed for a decentralized future Applied Clinical Trials 2022 2023-04-06 https://www.appliedclinicaltrialsonline.com/view/identifying-integrated-digital-platforms-designed-for-a-decen tralized-future Sadeghi M Carenini A Corcho O Rossi M Santoro R Vogelsang A Interoperability of heterogeneous systems of systems: from requirements to a reference architecture J Supercomput 2023 80 7 8954 8987 10.1007/s11227-023-05774-3 Torab-Miandoab A Samad-Soltani T Jodati A Rezaei-Hachesu P Interoperability of heterogeneous health information systems: a systematic literature review BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2023 23 1 18 10.1186/s12911-023-02115-5 36694161 10.1186/s12911-023-02115-5 PMC9875417 Dudzinski MA Garty D A guide for establishing and governing data collection standards Journal for Clinical Studies 2024 20 23 Nosheen M Syed Z An integration model resolving 3rd party source code/component incorporation issues during open source software development Int Arab J E Technol 2014 3 3 146 154 Steinhubl SR Wolff-Hughes D Nilsen W Iturriaga E Califf RM Digital clinical trials: creating a vision for the future NPJ Digit Med 2019 2 126 10.1038/s41746-019-0203-0 31872066 203 PMC6908600 Moorthy V Abubakar I Qadri F Ogutu B Zhang W Reeder J Farrar J The future of the global clinical trial ecosystem: a vision from the first WHO Global Clinical Trials Forum Lancet 2024 403 10422 124 126 10.1016/S0140-6736(23)02798-8 38128557 S0140-6736(23)02798-8 Coyle J Rogers A Copland R De Paoli G MacDonald T Mackenzie IS Trials@Home Consortium Learning from remote decentralised clinical trial experiences: a qualitative analysis of interviews with trial personnel, patient representatives and other stakeholders Br J Clin Pharmacol 2022 88 3 1031 1042 10.1111/bcp.15003 34296777 PMC9290051 Pepine CJ Handberg-Thurmond E Marks RG Conlon M Cooper-DeHoff R Volkers P Zellig P Rationale and design of the International Verapamil SR/Trandolapril Study (INVEST): an internet-based randomized trial in coronary artery disease patients with hypertension J Am Coll Cardiol 1998 32 5 1228 1237 10.1016/s0735-1097(98)00423-9 9809930 S0735109798004239 Pepine CJ Handberg EM Cooper-DeHoff RM Marks RG Kowey P Messerli FH Mancia G Cangiano JL Garcia-Barreto D Keltai M Erdine S Bristol HA Kolb HR Bakris GL Cohen JD Parmley WW A calcium antagonist vs a non-calcium antagonist hypertension treatment strategy for patients with coronary artery disease. The International Verapamil-Trandolapril Study (INVEST): a randomized controlled trial JAMA 2003 290 21 2805 2816 10.1001/jama.290.21.2805 14657064 290/21/2805 Schoichet S Creasey G Kasay S A systems infrastructure for sponsor/CRO collaboration on international clinical trials Drug Inf J 1998 32 1 155 161 10.1177/009286159803200122 McAlindon T Formica M LaValley M Lehmer M Kabbara K Effectiveness of glucosamine for symptoms of knee osteoarthritis: results from an internet-based randomized double-blind controlled trial Am J Med 2004 117 9 643 649 10.1016/j.amjmed.2004.06.023 15501201 S0002-9343(04)00477-2 Jacobs BP Bent S Tice JA Blackwell T Cummings SR An internet-based randomized, placebo-controlled trial of kava and valerian for anxiety and insomnia Medicine 2005 84 4 197 207 10.1097/01.md.0000172299.72364.95 16010204 00005792-200507000-00001 Eilenberg KL Hoover AM Rutherford ML Melfi CA Segal S From informed consent through database lock: an interactive clinical trial conducted using the internet Drug Inf J 2004 38 3 239 251 10.1177/009286150403800303 Gelfand AA Qubty W Patniyot I Grimes B Pletcher MJ Goadsby PJ Cummings SR Home-based trials in adolescent migraine: a randomized clinical trial JAMA Neurol 2017 74 6 744 745 10.1001/jamaneurol.2017.0285 28437521 2622651 PMC5822205 Olden M Wyka K Cukor J Peskin M Altemus M Lee FS Finkelstein-Fox L Rabinowitz T Difede J Pilot study of a telehealth-delivered medication-augmented exposure therapy protocol for PTSD J Nerv Ment Dis 2017 205 2 154 160 10.1097/NMD.0000000000000563 27441461 PMC5253124 REDCap Vanderbilt University 2023-04-06 https://www.project-redcap.org/ Harris PA Taylor R Thielke R Payne J Gonzalez N Conde JG Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support J Biomed Inform 2009 42 2 377 381 10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010 18929686 S1532-0464(08)00122-6 PMC2700030 Higgins SB Jiang K Plummer WD Edens TR Stroud MJ Swindell BB Wheeler AP Bernard GR Pivot/remote: a distributed database for remote data entry in multi-center clinical trials Medinfo 1995 8 1097 8591379 Kianersi S Luetke M Ludema C Valenzuela A Rosenberg M Use of research electronic data capture (REDCap) in a COVID-19 randomized controlled trial: a practical example BMC Med Res Methodol 2021 21 1 175 10.1186/s12874-021-01362-2 34418958 10.1186/s12874-021-01362-2 PMC8380110 Steger FL Donnelly JE Hull HR Li X Hu J Sullivan DK Intermittent and continuous energy restriction result in similar weight loss, weight loss maintenance, and body composition changes in a 6 month randomized pilot study Clin Obes 2021 11 2 e12430 10.1111/cob.12430 33305526 PMC9361403 ResearchKit Apple Inc 2023-04-06 https://researchkit.org/ Crouthamel M Quattrocchi E Watts S Wang S Berry P Garcia-Gancedo L Hamy V Williams R Using a ResearchKit smartphone app to collect rheumatoid arthritis symptoms from real-world participants: feasibility study JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2018 6 9 e177 10.2196/mhealth.9656 30213779 v6i9e177 PMC6231853 Radin JM Steinhubl SR Su AI Bhargava H Greenberg B Bot BM Doerr M Topol EJ The healthy pregnancy research program: transforming pregnancy research through a ResearchKit app NPJ Digit Med 2018 1 45 10.1038/s41746-018-0052-2 31304325 52 PMC6550256 IQVIA 2023-04-06 https://www.iqvia.com/ Medable 2023-04-06 https://www.medable.com/ Castor 2023-04-06 https://www.castoredc.com/ THREAD 2023-04-06 https://www.threadresearch.com/ ObvioHealth 2023-04-06 https://www.obviohealth.com/ Science 37 2023-04-06 https://www.science37.com/ Cognizant 2023-04-06 https://www.cognizant.com/uk/en AiCure 2023-04-06 https://aicure.com/ Trials@Home 2023-04-06 https://trialsathome.com/ Clinpal 2023-04-06 https://clinpal.com/ Farias FAC Dagostini CM Bicca YA Falavigna VF Falavigna A Remote patient monitoring: a systematic review Telemed J E Health 2020 26 5 576 583 10.1089/tmj.2019.0066 31314689 Su D Michaud TL Estabrooks P Schwab RJ Eiland LA Hansen G DeVany M Zhang D Li Y Pagán JA Siahpush M Diabetes management through remote patient monitoring: the importance of patient activation and engagement with the technology Telemed J E Health 2019 25 10 952 959 10.1089/tmj.2018.0205 30372366 Wintrich J Pavlicek V Brachmann J Bosch R Butter C Oswald H Rybak K Mahfoud F Böhm M Ukena C Remote monitoring with appropriate reaction to alerts was associated with improved outcomes in chronic heart failure: results from the OptiLink HF study Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2021 14 1 e008693 10.1161/CIRCEP.120.008693 33301362 Anguera JA Jordan JT Castaneda D Gazzaley A Areán PA Conducting a fully mobile and randomised clinical trial for depression: access, engagement and expense BMJ Innov 2016 2 1 14 21 10.1136/bmjinnov-2015-000098 27019745 bmjinnov-2015-000098 PMC4789688 Omberg L Neto EC Perumal TM Pratap A Tediarjo A Adams J Bloem BR Bot BM Elson M Goldman SM Kellen MR Kieburtz K Klein A Little MA Schneider R Suver C Tarolli C Tanner CM Trister AD Wilbanks J Dorsey ER Mangravite LM Remote smartphone monitoring of Parkinson's disease and individual response to therapy Nat Biotechnol 2022 40 4 480 487 10.1038/s41587-021-00974-9 34373643 10.1038/s41587-021-00974-9 Meirte J Hellemans N Anthonissen M Denteneer L Maertens K Moortgat P Van Daele U Benefits and disadvantages of electronic patient-reported outcome measures: systematic review JMIR Perioper Med 2020 3 1 e15588 10.2196/15588 33393920 v3i1e15588 PMC7709853 Zylla DM Gilmore GE Steele GL Eklund JP Wood CM Stover AM Shapiro AC Collection of electronic patient-reported symptoms in patients with advanced cancer using Epic MyChart surveys Support Care Cancer 2020 28 7 3153 3163 10.1007/s00520-019-05109-0 31701269 10.1007/s00520-019-05109-0 Coons SJ Eremenco S Lundy JJ O'Donohoe P O'Gorman H Malizia W Capturing patient-reported outcome (PRO) data electronically: the past, present, and promise of ePRO measurement in clinical trials Patient 2015 8 4 301 309 10.1007/s40271-014-0090-z 25300613 PMC4529477 Pratap A Homiar A Waninger L Herd C Suver C Volponi J Anguera JA Areán P Real-world behavioral dataset from two fully remote smartphone-based randomized clinical trials for depression Sci Data 2022 9 1 522 10.1038/s41597-022-01633-7 36030226 10.1038/s41597-022-01633-7 PMC9420101 Oakley-Girvan I Yunis R Longmire M Ouillon JS What works best to engage participants in mobile app interventions and e-Health: a scoping review Telemed J E Health 2022 28 6 768 780 10.1089/tmj.2021.0176 34637651 PMC9231655 Sandborg J Henriksson P Larsen E Lindqvist AK Rutberg S Söderström E Maddison R Löf M Participants' engagement and satisfaction with a smartphone app intended to support healthy weight gain, diet, and physical activity during pregnancy: qualitative study within the HealthyMoms trial JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2021 9 3 e26159 10.2196/26159 33666554 v9i3e26159 PMC7980113 Eliasen A Abildtoft MK Krogh NS Rechnitzer C Brok JS Mathiasen R Schmiegelow K Dalhoff KP Smartphone app to self-monitor nausea during pediatric chemotherapy treatment: user-centered design process JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2020 8 7 e18564 10.2196/18564 32706744 v8i7e18564 PMC7400028 Coyle J Rogers A Copland R De Paoli G MacDonald TM Mackenzie IS Trials@Home Consortium A secondary qualitative analysis of stakeholder views about participant recruitment, retention, and adherence in decentralised clinical trials (DCTs) Trials 2022 23 1 614 10.1186/s13063-022-06521-4 35907888 10.1186/s13063-022-06521-4 PMC9338512 Deterding S Dixon D Khaled R Nacke L From game design elements to gamefulness: defining "gamification" 2011 Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments 2011 New York, NY, United States Tampere, Finland Association for Computing Machinery 9 15 10.1145/2181037.2181040 Sailer M Hense JU Mayr SK Mandl H How gamification motivates: an experimental study of the effects of specific game design elements on psychological need satisfaction Comput Hum Behav 2017 69 371 380 10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.033 Pramana G Parmanto B Lomas J Lindhiem O Kendall PC Silk J Using mobile health gamification to facilitate cognitive behavioral therapy skills practice in child anxiety treatment: open clinical trial JMIR Serious Games 2018 6 2 e9 10.2196/games.8902 29748165 v6i2e9 PMC5968217 Waddell KJ Patel MS Clark K Harrington TO Greysen SR Effect of gamification with social incentives on daily steps after stroke: a randomized clinical trial JAMA Neurol 2022 79 5 528 530 10.1001/jamaneurol.2022.0231 35344027 2790532 PMC8961396 Patel MS Small DS Harrison JD Fortunato MP Oon AL Rareshide CAL Reh G Szwartz G Guszcza J Steier D Kalra P Hilbert V Effectiveness of behaviorally designed gamification interventions with social incentives for increasing physical activity among overweight and obese adults across the United States: the STEP UP randomized clinical trial JAMA Intern Med 2019 179 12 1624 1632 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.3505 31498375 2749761 PMC6735420 Allam A Kostova Z Nakamoto K Schulz PJ The effect of social support features and gamification on a web-based intervention for rheumatoid arthritis patients: randomized controlled trial J Med Internet Res 2015 17 1 e14 10.2196/jmir.3510 25574939 v17i1e14 PMC4296094 Lukas CA Eskofier B Berking M A gamified smartphone-based intervention for depression: randomized controlled pilot trial JMIR Ment Health 2021 8 7 e16643 10.2196/16643 34283037 v8i7e16643 PMC8335612 Looyestyn J Kernot J Boshoff K Ryan J Edney S Maher C Does gamification increase engagement with online programs? A systematic review PLoS One 2017 12 3 e0173403 10.1371/journal.pone.0173403 28362821 PONE-D-16-45655 PMC5376078 Blake K Holbrook JT Antal H Shade D Bunnell HT McCahan SM Wise RA Pennington C Garfinkel P Wysocki T Use of mobile devices and the internet for multimedia informed consent delivery and data entry in a pediatric asthma trial: study design and rationale Contemp Clin Trials 2015 42 105 118 10.1016/j.cct.2015.03.012 25847579 S1551-7144(15)00067-1 PMC4450122 Tarolli C Andrzejewski K Bull M Goldenthal S O’Brien M Simuni T Zimmerman G Biglan K Dorsey E Virtual research visits in individuals with Parkinson disease enrolled in a clinical trial: REACT-PD study interim analysis (P4.005) Neurology 2017 88 10.1212/wnl.88.16_supplement.p4.005 Sun C Sun L Xi S Zhang H Wang H Feng Y Deng Y Wang H Xiao X Wang G Gao Y Wang G Mobile phone-based telemedicine practice in older Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: randomized controlled trial JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2019 7 1 e10664 10.2196/10664 30609983 v7i1e10664 PMC6682265 Why does data traceability matter—and how do platforms help? Aetion 2019 2023-04-06 https://aetion.com/evidence-hub/data-traceability-how-do-platforms-help/ Nugent T Upton D Cimpoesu M Improving data transparency in clinical trials using blockchain smart contracts F1000Res 2016 5 2541 10.12688/f1000research.9756.1 28357041 PMC5357027 Ichikawa D Kashiyama M Ueno T Tamper-resistant mobile health using blockchain technology JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2017 5 7 e111 10.2196/mhealth.7938 28747296 v5i7e111 PMC5550736 Maslove DM Klein J Brohman K Martin P Using blockchain technology to manage clinical trials data: a proof-of-concept study JMIR Med Inform 2018 6 4 e11949 10.2196/11949 30578196 v6i4e11949 PMC6320404 Zhuang Y Sheets L Shae Z Tsai JJP Shyu CR Applying blockchain technology for health information exchange and persistent monitoring for clinical trials AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2018 2018 1167 1175 30815159 PMC6371378 Liang X Shetty S Zhao J Bowden D Li D Liu J Towards decentralized accountability and self-sovereignty in healthcare systems 2017 International Conference on Information and Communications Security, 19th International Conference 2017 Dec 08 Beijing, China Springer International 387 398 10.1007/978-3-319-89500-0_34 De Brouwer W Patel CJ Manrai AK Rodriguez-Chavez I Shah NR Empowering clinical research in a decentralized world NPJ Digit Med 2021 4 1 102 10.1038/s41746-021-00473-w 34211085 10.1038/s41746-021-00473-w PMC8249659 Anderson K Burford O Emmerton L Mobile health apps to facilitate self-care: a qualitative study of user experiences PLoS One 2016 11 5 e0156164 10.1371/journal.pone.0156164 27214203 PONE-D-16-02829 PMC4876999 CTTI recommendations: decentralized clinical trials Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative 2018 2023-04-06 https://ctti-cli nicaltrials.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/CTTI_DCT_Recs.pdf Lau AY Piper K Bokor D Martin P Lau VS Coiera E Challenges during implementation of a patient-facing mobile app for surgical rehabilitation: feasibility study JMIR Hum Factors 2017 4 4 e31 10.2196/humanfactors.8096 29217504 v4i4e31 PMC5740262 Reade S Spencer K Sergeant JC Sperrin M Schultz DM Ainsworth J Lakshminarayana R Hellman B James B McBeth J Sanders C Dixon WG Cloudy with a chance of pain: engagement and subsequent attrition of daily data entry in a smartphone pilot study tracking weather, disease severity, and physical activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2017 5 3 e37 10.2196/mhealth.6496 28341616 v5i3e37 PMC5384994 Shabir H D'Costa M Mohiaddin Z Moti Z Rashid H Sadowska D Alam B Cox B The barriers and facilitators to the use of lifestyle apps: a systematic review of qualitative studies Eur J Investig Health Psychol Educ 2022 12 2 144 165 10.3390/ejihpe12020012 35200235 ejihpe12020012 PMC8871456 Adu MD Malabu UH Malau-Aduli AEO Malau-Aduli BS Users' preferences and design recommendations to promote engagements with mobile apps for diabetes self-management: multi-national perspectives PLoS One 2018 13 12 e0208942 10.1371/journal.pone.0208942 30532235 PONE-D-18-27365 PMC6287843 Juarascio AS Goldstein SP Manasse SM Forman EM Butryn ML Perceptions of the feasibility and acceptability of a smartphone application for the treatment of binge eating disorders: qualitative feedback from a user population and clinicians Int J Med Inform 2015 84 10 808 816 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2015.06.004 26113461 S1386-5056(15)30009-5 PMC4860812 Abreu M Carmo AS Franco A Parreira S Vidal B Costa M Peralta AR da Silva HP Bentes C Fred A Mobile applications for epilepsy: Where are we? Where should we go? A systematic review Signals 2022 3 1 40 65 10.3390/signals3010005 Morton E Nicholas J Lapadat L O'Brien H Barnes SJ Poh C Michalak EE Use of smartphone apps in bipolar disorder: an international web-based survey of feature preferences and privacy concerns J Affect Disord 2021 295 1102 1109 10.1016/j.jad.2021.08.132 34706421 S0165-0327(21)00937-X Flaherty SJ McCarthy M Collins A McAuliffe F Can existing mobile apps support healthier food purchasing behaviour? Content analysis of nutrition content, behaviour change theory and user quality integration Public Health Nutr 2018 21 2 288 298 10.1017/S1368980017002889 29081322 S1368980017002889 PMC10261053 Peng W Kanthawala S Yuan S Hussain SA A qualitative study of user perceptions of mobile health apps BMC Public Health 2016 16 1 1158 10.1186/s12889-016-3808-0 27842533 10.1186/s12889-016-3808-0 PMC5109835 Urbano ICVP Guerreiro JPV Nicolau HMAA From skeuomorphism to flat design: age-related differences in performance and aesthetic perceptions Behav Inf Technol 2020 41 3 452 467 10.1080/0144929x.2020.1814867 Evett L Brown D Text formats and web design for visually impaired and dyslexic readers—clear text for all Interacting Comput 2005 17 4 453 472 10.1016/j.intcom.2005.04.001 Sakamoto K Kato C Effects on memorized information quantity in web pages using bicolor design—from the perspective of color blind people and non-color blind people Indian J Public Health Res Dev 2020 11 1 1839 1843 10.37506/ijphrd.v11i1.1389 Ellfattah A Tawfik M Web design for color blind persons Int Des J 2014 4 4 37 46 10.21608/idj.2014.109774 Kirwan M Duncan MJ Vandelanotte C Mummery WK Design, development, and formative evaluation of a smartphone application for recording and monitoring physical activity levels: the 10,000 steps "iStepLog" Health Educ Behav 2013 40 2 140 151 10.1177/1090198112449460 22984196 1090198112449460 Lazard AJ Watkins I Mackert MS Xie B Stephens KK Shalev H Design simplicity influences patient portal use: the role of aesthetic evaluations for technology acceptance J Am Med Inform Assoc 2016 23 e1 e157 e161 10.1093/jamia/ocv174 26635314 ocv174 PMC4954622 Ling J van Schaik P The influence of font type and line length on visual search and information retrieval in web pages Int J Hum Comput Stud 2006 64 5 395 404 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.08.015 Varela M Mäki T Skorin-Kapov L Hoßfeld T Towards an understanding of visual appeal in website design 2013 Fifth International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX) July 3, 2013 Klagenfurt am Wörthersee, Austria IEEE 70 75 10.1109/qomex.2013.6603213 Ashraf N Faisal MN Jabbar S Habib MA The role of website design artifacts on consumer attitude and behavioral intentions in online shopping Technical Journal 2019 24 2 50 60 Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society 2023-04-06 https://www.himss.org/ Lu Z Su J Clinical data management: current status, challenges, and future directions from industry perspectives Open Access J Clin Trials 2010 2 93 105 10.2147/oajct.s8172 Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources HL7 2011 2023-04-06 https://www.hl7.org/fhir/ Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium 2023-04-06 https://www.cdisc.org/ GS1 pharmaceutical clinical trial electronic messaging standard implementation guideline GS1 2021 2023-04-06 https://ref.gs1.org/guidelines/pharma-clinical-trial/ Neumayer B Schnalzer B Alcalde B Trappenburg J Technology package for the pan-EU pilot study including data flows and connections with external systems where necessary Trials@Home 2021 2023-04-06 https://trialsathome.com/deliverables/