Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Digital Health Landscape in Addiction and Substance Use Research: Will Digital Health Exacerbate or Mitigate Health Inequities in Vulnerable Populations?

  • Mobile Health (K Garrison, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Addiction Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Novel and emerging digital health technologies are increasingly used in substance use and addiction-related self-management and treatment research. The promise of digital health is exciting, yet there are important factors regarding population characteristics to consider prior to using novel technologies with vulnerable populations. This paper reports a review of scientific literature published between 2015 and early 2020 on the use of digital health strategies in research focused on substance use and addiction in vulnerable populations.

Recent Findings

Using 13 search terms, three databases were screened for published literature meeting specific inclusion criteria. Common themes expressed across the 32 resulting publications included user acceptability, product reliability, and privacy and security concerns.

Summary

Implementation of evidence-based frameworks and guidelines is needed to guide future digital health research in vulnerable populations. Guidance should involve robust evaluations of acceptability, feasibility, and clinically meaningful use of digital health in diverse populations experiencing addiction-related health concerns.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Raŝković D, Milenković A, De Groen PC, Jovanov E. From telemedicine to ubiquitous M-Health. Biomedical Information Technology. 2008:479–96.

  2. LeRouge C, Garfield MJ. Crossing the telemedicine chasm: have the U.S. barriers to widespread adoption of telemedicine been significantly reduced? Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2013;10(12):6472–84.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. •• Brewer LPC, Fortuna KL, Jones C, Walker R, Hayes SN, Patten CA, et al. Back to the future: achieving health equity through health informatics and digital health. JMIR mHealth uHealth. 2020;8(1):e14512 The Brewer et al. (2020) manucript provided crucial context regarding health inequity experienced from a community-based approach lens which is essential in all research.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Topol EJ, Steinhubl SR, Torkamani A. Digital medical tools and sensors. JAMA. 2015;313(4):353–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Carreiro S, Chai PR, Carey J, Lai J, Smelson D, Boyer EW. mHealth for the detection and intervention in adolescent and young adult substance use disorder. Curr Addict Reports. 2018;5(2):110–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Lai J, Chapman B, Carreiro S, Costigan A, Rodriguez Perez K, Gonzalez G, et al. A pilot study of a telemedicine-based substance use disorder evaluation to enhance access to treatment following near-fatal opioid overdose. Proc 53rd Hawaii Int Conf Syst Sci. 2020.

  7. Pilemalm S, Timpka T. Third generation participatory design in health informatics-making user participation applicable to large-scale information system projects. J Biomed Inform. 2008;41(2):327–39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Topol E. The patient will see you now: the future of medicine is in your hands. New York: Basic Books; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Nebeker C, Dunseath SE, Linares-Orozco R. A retrospective analysis of NIH-funded digital health research using social media platforms. Digit Heal. 2020;6(January).

  10. Stone AA, Shiffman S. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) in behavioral medicine. Ann Behav Med. 1994;16(3):199–202. https://doi.org/10.1093/abm/16.3.199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Burke L, Shiffman S, Music E, Styn M, Kriska A, Smailagic A, et al. Ecological momentary assessment in behavioral research: addressing technological and human participant challenges. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(3).

  12. Mohr D, Zhang M, Schueller S. Personal sensing: understanding mental health using ubiquitous sensors and machine learning. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2017;13:23–47. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032816-044949.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Bui A, Van Horn J. Envisioning the future of ‘big data’ biomedicine. J Biomed Inform. 2017;69:115–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2017.03.017.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. All T, Investigators P, All T, Obama PB, Initiative PM, Institutes N, et al. Special report: the “all of us” research program. 2019.

  15. Bailey ZD, Krieger N, Agénor M, Graves J, Linos N, Bassett MT. Structural racism and health inequities in the USA: evidence and interventions. Lancet. 2017;389(10077):1453–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30569-X.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Stowell E, Lyson MC, Saksono H, Wurth RC, Jimison H, Pavel M, et al. Designing and evaluating mHealth interventions for vulnerable populations: A systematic review. Conf Hum Factors Comput Syst - Proc. 2018:1–17.

  17. BankMyCell. No Title [Internet]. UNE 2020 mobile user statistics: discover the number of phones in the world & smartphone penetration by country or region 2020. https://www.bankmycell.com/blog/how-many-phones-are-in-the-world.

  18. Center PR. No Title [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 Nov 4]. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/mobile/.

  19. Anderson BYM. Monica Anderson. Pew Res Cent. 2015;(June):1–26 http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/10/29/technology-device-ownership-2015/.

  20. • Blankers M, Mujcic A. E-health and m-health: using new technologies to respond to drug problems. Eur Monit Cent Drugs Drug Addict. 2017:1–20 www.bct-taxonomy.com. The Blankers et al. (2017) manuscripts provided insights on which evidence-based tools are currently utilized in substance use interventions. This provided a foundation of knowledge for the author of what evidence-based tools are out there and where gaps in the literature exists regarding the inclusion of vulnerable populations.

  21. Haug S, Paz Castro R, Meyer C, Filler A, Kowatsch T, Schaub MP. A mobile phone-based life skills training program for substance use prevention among adolescents: pre-post study on the acceptance and potential effectiveness of the program, Ready4life. JMIR mHealth uHealth. 2017;5(10):e143.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. • Capon H, Hall W, Fry C, Carter A. Realising the technological promise of smartphones in addiction research and treatment: an ethical review. Int J Drug Policy. 2016;36:47–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2016.05.013The Capon et al. (2016) provided perspective on ethical layers needed to be considered in a digital health study design focused on substance use and addiction. This allowed the authors to assess the literature collected from a ethical and legal perspective.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Tofighi B, Chemi C, Ruiz-Valcarcel J, Hein P, Hu L. Smartphone apps targeting alcohol and illicit substance use: systematic search in in commercial app stores and critical content analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(4).

  24. Bagot K, Hodgdon E, Sidhu N, Patrick K, Kelly M, Lu Y, et al. End user–informed mobile health intervention development for adolescent cannabis use disorder: qualitative study. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(10):1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Bonar E, Koocher G, Benoit M, Collins L, Cranford J, Walton M. Ethics Behav. 2018;28(3):218–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2017.1293541f.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Nebeker C, Murray K, Holub C, Haughton J, Arredondo EM. Acceptance of mobile health in communities underrepresented in biomedical research: barriers and ethical considerations for scientists. JMIR mHealth uHealth. 2017;5(6):e87.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Tyler TJL and M. What is addiction? [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2020 Nov 4]. Available from: https://www.healthline.com/health/addiction.

  28. Snowdon A. HIMSS defines digital health for the global healthcare industry [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2020 Nov 4]. Available from: https://www.himss.org/news/himss-defines-digital-health-global-healthcare-industry.

  29. British Columbia Health Link. Substance use [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 Nov 4]. Available from: https://www.healthlinkbc.ca/substance-use.

  30. PRISMA transparent reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses [Internet]. 2015. Available from: http://www.prisma-statement.org/PRISMAStatement/.

  31. Møller A, Bissenbakker KH, Arreskov AB, Brodersen J. Specific measures of quality of life in patients with multimorbidity in primary healthcare: a systematic review on patient-reported outcome measures’ adequacy of measurement. Patient Relat Outcome Meas. 2020;11:1–10.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Information MH, Project M. A review of screening, assessment and outcome measures for drug and alcohol settings. 2009.

  33. McKay JR, Gustafson DH, Ivey M, McTavish F, Pe-Romashko K, Curtis B, et al. Effects of automated smartphone mobile recovery support and telephone continuing care in the treatment of alcohol use disorder: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2018;19(1):1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Glass J, McKay J, Gustafson D, Kornfiled R, Rathouz P, McTavish F, et al. Treatment seeking as a mechanism of change in a randomized controlled trial of a mobile health intervention to support recovery from alcohol use disorders. J Subst Abus Treat. 2017;77:57–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2017.03.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Yoo W, Shah DV, Chih MY, Gustafson DH. A smartphone-based support group for alcoholism: effects of giving and receiving emotional support on coping self-efficacy and risky drinking. Health Informatics J. 2019:146045821988840.

  36. Yang C, Linas B, Kirk G, Bollinger R, Chang L, Chander G, et al. Feasibility and acceptability of smartphone-based ecological momentary assessment of alcohol use among African American men who have sex with men in Baltimore. JMIR mHealth uHealth. 2015;3(2):e67.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Vidrine DJ, Frank-Pearce SG, Vidrine JI, Tahay PD, Marani SK, Chen S, et al. Efficacy of mobile phone-delivered smoking cessation interventions for socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2019;179(2):167–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Hooper MW, Carpenter KM, Salmon EE. Web-based tobacco cessation interventions and digital inequality across US racial/ethnic groups. Ethn Dis. 2019;29(3):495–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Liang D, Han H, Du J, Zhao M, Hser YI. A pilot study of a smartphone application supporting recovery from drug addiction. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2018;88:51–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2018.02.006.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Spears CA, Abroms LC, Glass CR, Hedeker D, Eriksen MP, Cottrell-Daniels C, et al. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019;7(6) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6613894/.

  41. Quanbeck A, Gustafson DH, Marsch LA, Chih MY, Kornfield R, McTavish F, et al. Implementing a mobile health system to integrate the treatment of addiction into primary care: a hybrid implementation-effectiveness study. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(1).

  42. Johnson AC, Lipkus I, Tercyak KP, Luta G, Rehberg K, Phan L, et al. Development and pretesting of risk-based mobile multimedia message content for young adult hookah use. Heal Educ Behav. 2019;46(2_suppl):97–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Sillice MA, Dunsiger S, Jennings E, Lantini R, Bock BC. Differences in mobile phone affinity between demographic groups: implications for mobile phone delivered interventions and programs. mHealth. 2018;4(August):39.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Mares ML, Gustafson DH, Glass JE, Quanbeck A, McDowell H, McTavish F, et al. Implementing an mHealth system for substance use disorders in primary care: a mixed methods study of clinicians’ initial expectations and first year experiences. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2016;16(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-016-0365-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Cordova D, Bauermeister JA, Fessler K, Delva J, Nelson A, Nurenberg R, et al. A community-engaged approach to developing an mHealth HIV/STI and drug abuse preventive intervention for primary care: a qualitative study. JMIR mHealth uHealth. 2015;3(4):e106.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Brown S-E, Krishnan A, Ranjit YS, Marcus R, Altice FL. Assessing mobile health feasibility and acceptability among HIV-infected cocaine users and their healthcare providers: guidance for implementing an intervention. mHealth. 2020;6(September):4–4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Curtis B, Bergman B, Brown A, McDaniel J, Harper K, Eisenhart E, et al. Characterizing participation and perceived engagement benefits in an integrated digital Behavioral health recovery community for women: a cross-sectional survey. JMIR Ment Heal. 2019;6(8):e13352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Curtis BL, Ashford RD, Magnuson KI, Ryan-Pettes SR. Comparison of smartphone ownership, social media use, and willingness to use digital interventions between generation Z and millennials in the treatment of substance use: cross-sectional questionnaire study. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(4).

  49. Shrestha R, Huedo-Medina TB, Altice FL, Krishnan A, Copenhaver M. Examining the acceptability of mHealth technology in HIV prevention among high-risk drug users in treatment. AIDS Behav. 2017;21(11):3100–10.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Ryan-Pettes SR, Lange LL, Magnuson KI. Mobile phone access and preference for technology-assisted aftercare among low-income caregivers of teens enrolled in outpatient substance use treatment: questionnaire study. JMIR mHealth uHealth. 2019;7(9):1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. • Tofighi B, Leonard N, Greco P, Hadavand A, Acosta MC, Lee JD. Technology use patterns among patients enrolled in inpatient detoxification treatment. J Addict Med. 2019;13(4):279–86 The Tofighi et al. (2019) manuscript provided insights on diverse platforms utilized to assess substance use and abuse. This served as a great source assessing participant perspectives on use of digital health and barriers that may effect the adoption of the tool.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Hochstatter KR, Gustafson DH Sr, Landucci G et al. AMHI to IHCOAPWOUDP for a RCTJRP 2019;8(8):e12620. P 2019 A 1. doi:https://doi.org/10.2196/1262. A mobile health intervention to improve hepatitis C outcomes among people with opioid use disorder: protocol for a randomized controlled trial. JMIR. 2019;8(8).

  53. Harder VS, Musau AM, Musyimi CW, Ndetei DM, Mutiso VN. A randomized clinical trial of mobile phone motivational interviewing for alcohol use problems in Kenya. Addiction. 2019.

  54. Zhang M, Ying J, Amron SB, Mahreen Z, Song G, Fung DSS, et al. A smartphone attention bias app for individuals with addictive disorders: feasibility and acceptability study. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(9).

  55. Pretlow RA, Stock CM, Roeger L, Allison S. Treatment of the sensory and motor components of urges to eat (eating addiction?): a mobile-health pilot study for obesity in young people. Eat Weight Disord [Internet]. 2020; Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40519-019-00836-z.

  56. Guille C, Simpson AN, Douglas E, Boyars L, Cristaldi K, McElligott J, et al. Treatment of opioid use disorder in pregnant women via telemedicine: a nonrandomized controlled trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(1):e1920177.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Anderson KE, Byrne CE, Crosby RD, Le Grange D. Utilizing Telehealth to deliver family-based treatment for adolescent anorexia nervosa. Int J Eat Disord. 2017;50(10):1235–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Vidmar AP, Pretlow R, Borzutzky C, Wee CP, Fox DS, Fink C, et al. An addiction model-based mobile health weight loss intervention in adolescents with obesity. Pediatr Obes. 2019;14(2):1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Molfenter T, Boyle M, Holloway D, Zwick J. Trends in telemedicine use in addiction treatment. Addict Sci Clin Pract [Internet]. 2015;10(1):1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Reginald Fils-Aime J, Grelotti DJ, Thérosme T, Kaiser BN, Raviola G, Alcindor Y, et al. A mobile clinic approach to the delivery of community-based mental health services in rural Haiti. PLoS One. 2018;13(6):1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Weintraub E, Greenblatt AD, Chang J, Himelhoch S, Welsh C. Expanding access to buprenorphine treatment in rural areas with the use of telemedicine. Am J Addict. 2018;27(8):612–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Coravos A, Doerr M, Goldsack J, Manta C, Shervey M, Woods B, et al. Modernizing and designing evaluation frameworks for connected sensor technologies in medicine. NPJ Digit Med. 2020;3(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-020-0237-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Goldsack JC, Coravos A, Bakker JP, Bent B, Dowling AV, Fitzer-Attas C, et al. Verification, analytical validation, and clinical validation (V3): the foundation of determining fit-for-purpose for biometric monitoring technologies (BioMeTs). NPJ Digit Med. 2020;3:55.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Nebeker C, Bartlett Ellis RJ, Torous J. Development of a decision-making checklist tool to support technology selection in digital health research. Transl Behav Med. 2019.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Dr. Jerel Calzo, PhD., for providing feedback on an earlier version of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Joint Doctoral Program, University of California, San Diego and San Diego State University, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA

    Dina Hamideh

  2. The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA, 92037, USA

    Dina Hamideh

  3. Department of Family Medicine and Public Health, School of Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, 92093-0811, USA

    Camille Nebeker

  4. Research Center for Optimal Digital Ethics in Health (ReCODE Health), UC San Diego, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA

    Camille Nebeker

  5. The Design Lab, UC San Diego, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA

    Camille Nebeker

Authors
  1. Dina Hamideh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Camille Nebeker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Camille Nebeker.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human Subjects

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Mobile Health

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hamideh, D., Nebeker, C. The Digital Health Landscape in Addiction and Substance Use Research: Will Digital Health Exacerbate or Mitigate Health Inequities in Vulnerable Populations?. Curr Addict Rep 7, 317–332 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-020-00325-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-020-00325-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation