Defining the Digital Measurement of Scratching During Sleep or Nocturnal Scratching: Review of the Literature

BackgroundDigital sensing solutions represent a convenient, objective, relatively inexpensive method that could be leveraged for assessing symptoms of various health conditions. Recent progress in the capabilities of digital sensing products has targeted the measurement of scratching during sleep, traditionally referred to as nocturnal scratching, in patients with atopic dermatitis or other skin conditions. Many solutions measuring nocturnal scratch have been developed; however, a lack of efforts toward standardization of the measure’s definition and contextualization of scratching during sleep hampers the ability to compare different technologies for this purpose. ObjectiveWe aimed to address this gap and bring forth unified measurement definitions for nocturnal scratch. MethodsWe performed a narrative literature review of definitions of scratching in patients with skin inflammation and a targeted literature review of sleep in the context of the period during which such scratching occurred. Both searches were limited to English language studies in humans. The extracted data were synthesized into themes based on study characteristics: scratch as a behavior, other characterization of the scratching movement, and measurement parameters for both scratch and sleep. We then developed ontologies for the digital measurement of sleep scratching. ResultsIn all, 29 studies defined inflammation-related scratching between 1996 and 2021. When cross-referenced with the results of search terms describing the sleep period, only 2 of these scratch-related papers also described sleep-related variables. From these search results, we developed an evidence-based and patient-centric definition of nocturnal scratch: an action of rhythmic and repetitive skin contact movement performed during a delimited time period of intended and actual sleep that is not restricted to any specific time of the day or night. Based on the measurement properties identified in the searches, we developed ontologies of relevant concepts that can be used as a starting point to develop standardized outcome measures of scratching during sleep in patients with inflammatory skin conditions. ConclusionsThis work is intended to serve as a foundation for the future development of unified and well-described digital health technologies measuring nocturnal scratching and should enable better communication and sharing of results between various stakeholders taking part in research in atopic dermatitis and other inflammatory skin conditions

Remote and interdisciplinary research in surgical knowledge production.

BACKGROUND: Surgical knowledge production has changed dramatically in the last 30 y, moving away from investigations by individual surgeon researchers and toward remote and interdisciplinary research. We investigated how surgeons make decisions about engaging in research and identify motivators, facilitators, and barriers to conducting research in an increasingly challenging environment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a qualitative analysis of semistructured interviews with surgeons from academic medical centers across the United States. We asked participants to describe their experiences and opinions regarding remote and interdisciplinary collaborations. RESULTS: Of 64 surgeon researchers invited, 21 (33%) agreed and participated in semistructured interviews. Each interview lasted an average (standard deviation) of 29 min (12). Surgeons were motivated by both internal and external factors, including some that might be identified as barriers. The internal desire to improve care and the need for collaboration to address increasingly complex questions requiring larger samples sizes emerged as most significant to interview participants. Social networks were identified as the dominant facilitator of multisite research, with technology playing a supporting role. Barriers to remote and interdisciplinary research ranged from individual, micro level barriers, through structural barriers that include institutional level challenges and competing priorities, to macrolevel system and policy-level barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons clearly recognize the importance of high-quality research aligned with current paradigms of clinical care and are using remote and interdisciplinary collaboration to improve the quality of the science they produce and align their work with the demand for increasingly high levels of evidence

Sensor Data Integration: A New Cross-Industry Collaboration to Articulate Value, Define Needs, and Advance a Framework for Best Practices

Data integration, the processes by which data are aggregated, combined, and made available for use, has been key to the development and growth of many technological solutions. In health care, we are experiencing a revolution in the use of sensors to collect data on patient behaviors and experiences. Yet, the potential of this data to transform health outcomes is being held back. Deficits in standards, lexicons, data rights, permissioning, and security have been well documented, less so the cultural adoption of sensor data integration as a priority for large-scale deployment and impact on patient lives. The use and reuse of trustworthy data to make better and faster decisions across drug development and care delivery will require an understanding of all stakeholder needs and best practices to ensure these needs are met. The Digital Medicine Society is launching a new multistakeholder Sensor Data Integration Tour of Duty to address these challenges and more, providing a clear direction on how sensor data can fulfill its potential to enhance patient lives

Recent Academic Research on Clinically Relevant Digital Measures: Systematic Review

BackgroundDigital clinical measures collected via various digital sensing technologies such as smartphones, smartwatches, wearables, ingestibles, and implantables are increasingly used by individuals and clinicians to capture health outcomes or behavioral and physiological characteristics of individuals. Although academia is taking an active role in evaluating digital sensing products, academic contributions to advancing the safe, effective, ethical, and equitable use of digital clinical measures are poorly characterized. ObjectiveWe performed a systematic review to characterize the nature of academic research on digital clinical measures and to compare and contrast the types of sensors used and the sources of funding support for specific subareas of this research. MethodsWe conducted a PubMed search using a range of search terms to retrieve peer-reviewed articles reporting US-led academic research on digital clinical measures between January 2019 and February 2021. We screened each publication against specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. We then identified and categorized research studies based on the types of academic research, sensors used, and funding sources. Finally, we compared and contrasted the funding support for these specific subareas of research and sensor types. ResultsThe search retrieved 4240 articles of interest. Following the screening, 295 articles remained for data extraction and categorization. The top five research subareas included operations research (research analysis; n=225, 76%), analytical validation (n=173, 59%), usability and utility (data visualization; n=123, 42%), verification (n=93, 32%), and clinical validation (n=83, 28%). The three most underrepresented areas of research into digital clinical measures were ethics (n=0, 0%), security (n=1, 0.5%), and data rights and governance (n=1, 0.5%). Movement and activity trackers were the most commonly studied sensor type, and physiological (mechanical) sensors were the least frequently studied. We found that government agencies are providing the most funding for research on digital clinical measures (n=192, 65%), followed by independent foundations (n=109, 37%) and industries (n=56, 19%), with the remaining 12% (n=36) of these studies completely unfunded. ConclusionsSpecific subareas of academic research related to digital clinical measures are not keeping pace with the rapid expansion and adoption of digital sensing products. An integrated and coordinated effort is required across academia, academic partners, and academic funders to establish the field of digital clinical measures as an evidence-based field worthy of our trust

A patient‐centred conceptual model of nocturnal scratch and its impact in atopic dermatitis: A mixed‐methods study supporting the development of novel digital measurements

Abstract Background Emerging digital measures and clinical outcome assessments (COAs) leveraging digital health technologies (DHTs) could address the need for objective, quantitative measures of symptoms of atopic dermatitis (AD), such as nocturnal scratching. Development of such measures needs to be supported by evidence reflecting meaningfulness to patients. Objectives To assess nocturnal scratching as a concept of interest associated with meaningful aspects of health of patients with AD (adults and children); and to explore patient‐centred considerations for novel COAs measuring nocturnal scratch using DHTs. Methods Phase 1 evaluated disease impacts on everyday life and the lived experience with nocturnal scratching through qualitative interviews of AD patients and caregivers. Phase 2 deployed a quantitative survey to a sample of AD patients as well as caregivers. Results Four cohorts with various AD severity levels participated in Phase 1: (1) adults with AD (n = 15), (2) their caregivers/spouses/partners (n = 6), (3) children with AD (n = 14), and (4) their adult caregivers (n = 14). Findings were used to develop a conceptual model for nocturnal scratching as a potential concept of interest. The Phase 2 survey was completed by 1349 of 27640 invited adults with AD and caregivers of children with AD. The most burdensome aspects of AD reported were itchy skin and scratching. Overall, ∼65% of participants reported nocturnal scratching ≥1 day/week, resulting in ∼1–1.4 h of sleep lost per night. In all, 85%–91% of respondents considered it at least somewhat valuable that a treatment reduces night‐time scratching. About 50% reported willingness to use technology to this end and ∼25% were unsure. Conclusion Our results represented by the conceptual model confirm that nocturnal scratch is a concept of interest related to meaningful aspects of health for patients with AD and therefore is worth being captured as a distinct outcome for clinical and research purposes. DHTs are suitable tools presenting an important measurement opportunity to assess and evaluate occurrence, frequency, and other parameters of nocturnal scratching as a disease biomarker or COA of treatment efficacy

Advancing Digital Health Innovation in Oncology: Priorities for High-Value Digital Transformation in Cancer Care

Although health care delivery is becoming increasingly digitized, driven by the pursuit of improved access, equity, efficiency, and effectiveness, progress does not appear to be equally distributed across therapeutic areas. Oncology is renowned for leading innovation in research and in care; digital pathology, digital radiology, real-world data, next-generation sequencing, patient-reported outcomes, and precision approaches driven by complex data and biomarkers are hallmarks of the field. However, remote patient monitoring, decentralized approaches to care and research, “hospital at home,” and machine learning techniques have yet to be broadly deployed to improve cancer care. In response, the Digital Medicine Society and Moffitt Cancer Center convened a multistakeholder roundtable discussion to bring together leading experts in cancer care and digital innovation. This viewpoint highlights the findings from these discussions, in which experts agreed that digital innovation is lagging in oncology relative to other therapeutic areas. It reports that this lag is most likely attributed to poor articulation of the challenges in cancer care and research best suited to digital solutions, lack of incentives and support, and missing standardized infrastructure to implement digital innovations. It concludes with suggestions for actions needed to bring the promise of digitization to cancer care to improve lives

Rigorous and rapid evidence assessment in digital health with the evidence DEFINED framework

Abstract Dozens of frameworks have been proposed to assess evidence for digital health interventions (DHIs), but existing frameworks may not facilitate DHI evidence reviews that meet the needs of stakeholder organizations including payers, health systems, trade organizations, and others. These organizations may benefit from a DHI assessment framework that is both rigorous and rapid. Here we propose a framework to assess Evidence in Digital health for EFfectiveness of INterventions with Evaluative Depth (Evidence DEFINED). Designed for real-world use, the Evidence DEFINED Quick Start Guide may help streamline DHI assessment. A checklist is provided summarizing high-priority evidence considerations in digital health. Evidence-to-recommendation guidelines are proposed, specifying degrees of adoption that may be appropriate for a range of evidence quality levels. Evidence DEFINED differs from prior frameworks in its inclusion of unique elements designed for rigor and speed. Rigor is increased by addressing three gaps in prior frameworks. First, prior frameworks are not adapted adequately to address evidence considerations that are unique to digital health. Second, prior frameworks do not specify evidence quality criteria requiring increased vigilance for DHIs in the current regulatory context. Third, extant frameworks rarely leverage established, robust methodologies that were developed for non-digital interventions. Speed is achieved in the Evidence DEFINED Framework through screening optimization and deprioritization of steps that may have limited value. The primary goals of Evidence DEFINED are to a) facilitate standardized, rapid, rigorous DHI evidence assessment in organizations and b) guide digital health solutions providers who wish to generate evidence that drives DHI adoption