e.g. mhealth
Search Results (1 to 10 of 30017 Results)
Download search results: CSV END BibTex RIS
Skip search results from other journals and go to results- 8978 Journal of Medical Internet Research
- 4466 JMIR Research Protocols
- 3375 JMIR Formative Research
- 2661 JMIR mHealth and uHealth
- 1518 JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
- 1333 JMIR Medical Informatics
- 1085 JMIR Mental Health
- 927 JMIR Human Factors
- 674 JMIR Serious Games
- 581 JMIR Medical Education
- 508 JMIR Aging
- 469 JMIRx Med
- 441 JMIR Cancer
- 441 JMIR Pediatrics and Parenting
- 437 Interactive Journal of Medical Research
- 290 JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies
- 278 JMIR Diabetes
- 271 JMIR Dermatology
- 215 JMIR Cardio
- 173 JMIR Infodemiology
- 151 JMIR AI
- 120 JMIR Nursing
- 118 JMIR Perioperative Medicine
- 99 Journal of Participatory Medicine
- 82 JMIR Biomedical Engineering
- 77 Online Journal of Public Health Informatics
- 76 Iproceedings
- 35 JMIR Bioinformatics and Biotechnology
- 33 Asian/Pacific Island Nursing Journal
- 30 JMIRx Bio
- 26 JMIR Neurotechnology
- 22 JMIR XR and Spatial Computing (JMXR)
- 20 Medicine 2.0
- 4 JMIR Data
- 2 JMIR XR and Spatial Computing
- 1 JMIR Preprints
- 0 iProceedings
- 0 JMIR Challenges
- 0 Transfer Hub (manuscript eXchange)
The Role of Digital Health Equity Audits in Preventing Harmful Infodemiology
Emerging evidence from the scientific literature recognizes that access to digital technologies is now a determinant of health outcomes [12,13]. As digital determinants of health (DDo H) become increasingly recognized [14,15], a framework for digital health equity audits (DHEAs), including the evaluation of key DDo H, is needed.
JMIR Infodemiology 2025;5:e75495
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Through meta-analysis and literature review, we will examine the advantages, challenges, and potential of VR education from multiple perspectives.
This a systematic review and meta-analysis is in accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses; see Checklist 1) statement and AMSTAR (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews) guidelines, and it was conducted following the guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook [11].
J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e70266
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
This study was approved by the institutional review board of the National Rehabilitation Center (NRC; NRC-2023-03-020). All participants provided voluntary consent to participate after receiving a comprehensive explanation of the study objectives and methods. No compensation was provided for participating in the study. For the protection of personal information and the confidentiality of the participants, all data were anonymized.
JMIR Hum Factors 2025;12:e60607
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
The study was approved by the regional ethical review board (approval numbers 2016/135‐31, 2016/526‐32, and 2017/45‐32). The study was registered in Clinical Trials.gov (NCT03022812, initial release 12/20/2016) and the study protocol was published prior to data collection [19]. The original written and informed consent allowed for this secondary analysis without requiring additional consent, and no new data were collected for this study.
JMIR Hum Factors 2025;12:e67991
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Reference 1: “When offered to participate”: a systematic review and meta-analysis of patient agreement Factors that influence clinical trial participation by patients with cancer in Australia: a scoping review patient and public involvement in cancer prevention, screening and early detection research: a systematic review
J Particip Med 2025;17:e72015
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Questions then undergo internal review by other clinical or academic staff before external review by external examiners to ensure they meet rigorous requirements. Post hoc psychometric analysis of question performance is also used to drive evidence-based review and enhancement.
JMIR Med Educ 2025;11:e69521
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
This study was conducted according to the guidelines 2018 Federal Regulations 21 CFR 56.110(b) and 45 CFR 46.110(b) (for expedited review) and was approved under categories _6, _7 per 63 FR 60364. All procedures involving research study participants were approved by the Mercer University Institutional Review Board on April 2, 2020. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.
JMIR Form Res 2025;9:e58163
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
The trial was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Regional Ethical Review Board, Stockholm, Sweden (2018/652-31; 2018/1094‐32; 2018/2393‐32; 2020‐00591; 2020‐07005; and 2022-02557-02). It was also registered at Clinical Trials.gov (NCT03784612). All study participants received oral and written information about the study before giving their written consent before the study started.
JMIR Form Res 2025;9:e71408
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Therefore, effective HIE must include adequate interoperability; and (3) even when HIE occurs effectively, there is often a lack of organized presentation of the data; up to 34% of clinicians report delays in their care of transferred patients due to disorganization of medical records requiring extra time to review [16,17]. Thus, improving HIE during IHT must also address the user interface.
JMIR Hum Factors 2025;12:e67884
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
It was conducted as a quality assurance project, which does not need an ethical review by the regional or national research ethics committee [20]. This study was approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency (reference 23/19285).
Time recordings were carried out at multiple locations in the Region of Southern Denmark and the Capitol Region of Denmark.
JMIR Dermatol 2025;8:e66782
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS