V3+ extends the V3 framework to ensure user-centricity and scalability of sensor-based digital health technologies
Goldsack, J. C., Dowling, A. V., Samuelson, D., Patrick-Lake, B. & Clay, I. Evaluation, acceptance, and qualification of digital measures: from proof of concept to endpoint. Digit. Biomark. 5, 53–64 (2021).
Google Scholar
Taguibao, C. Celebrating the fourth anniversary of the Library of Digital Endpoints! Digital Medicine Society (DiMe) (2023).
Bellerophon. A study to assess pulsed inhaled nitric oxide in subjects with pulmonary fibrosis at risk for pulmonary hypertension (REBUILD). Clinical Trials (2023).
Servais, L. et al. First regulatory qualification of a digital primary endpoint to measure treatment efficacy in DMD. Nat. Med. 29, 2391–2392 (2023).
Google Scholar
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Medical Device Development Tool (MDDT) summary of evidence and basis of qualification Apple atrial fibrillation history feature. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2024).
Li, R. C., Asch, S. M. & Shah, N. H. Developing a delivery science for artificial intelligence in healthcare. NPJ Digit. Med. 3, 107 (2020).
Google Scholar
Marwaha, J. S., Landman, A. B., Brat, G. A., Dunn, T. & Gordon, W. J. Deploying digital health tools within large, complex health systems: key considerations for adoption and implementation. NPJ Digit. Med. 5, 13 (2022).
Google Scholar
Goldsack, J. 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. 3, 55 (2020).
Google Scholar
Mantua, V., Arango, C., Balabanov, P. & Butlen-Ducuing, F. Digital health technologies in clinical trials for central nervous system drugs: an EU regulatory perspective. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 20, 83–84 (2021).
Google Scholar
Colloud, S. et al. Evolving regulatory perspectives on digital health technologies for medicinal product development. NPJ Digit. Med. 6, 56 (2023).
Google Scholar
Sacks, L. & Kunkoski, E. Digital health technology to measure drug efficacy in clinical trials for Parkinson’s disease: a regulatory perspective. J. Parkinsons Dis. 11, S111–S115 (2021).
Google Scholar
Digital Medicine Society (DiMe). Resources in action. Digital Medicine Society (DiMe) (2022).
Center for Drug Evaluation & Research. Digital Health Technologies (DHTs) for drug development. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2023).
American Medical Association. Future of health- commercial payer coverage for digital medicine codes. American Medical Association (2023).
Kang, H. S. & Exworthy, M. Wearing the future-wearables to empower users to take greater responsibility for their health and care: scoping review. JMIR mHealth uHealth 10, e35684 (2022).
Google Scholar
Adedinsewo, D. et al. Health disparities, clinical trials, and the digital divide. Mayo Clin. Proc. 98, 1875–1887 (2023).
Google Scholar
Landers, M., Dorsey, R. & Saria, S. Digital endpoints: definition, benefits, and current barriers in accelerating development and adoption. Digit. Biomark. 5, 216–223 (2021).
Google Scholar
Adams, J. L. et al. Using a smartwatch and smartphone to assess early Parkinson’s disease in the WATCH-PD study. NPJ Parkinson’s Dis. 9, 64 (2023).
Google Scholar
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Class 2 device recall. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2006).
Center for Drug Evaluation & Research. Digital health technologies for remote data acquisition in clinical investigations. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2023).
Tandon, A. et al. Human Factors, Human-Centered Design, and Usability of Sensor-Based Digital Health Technologies: Scoping Review. J. Med. Internet Res. 26, e57628 (2024).
Google Scholar
Center for Devices & Radiological Health. General wellness: Policy for low risk devices—guidance for industry and FDA staff. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2019).
U.S Food and Drug Administration. Premarket approval (PMA). U.S Food and Drug Administration (2023).
Center for Devices & Radiological Health. Ingestible telemetric gastrointestinal capsule imaging system – final class II special controls guidance document for industry and FDA. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2021).
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Device classification under section 513(f)(2)(De Novo). U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2023).
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 510(k) premarket notification. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2015).
Center for Devices & Radiological Health. Applying human factors and usability engineering to medical devices. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2016).
U. S Food and Drug Administration. Human factors studies and related clinical study considerations in combination product design and development- draft guidance for industry and FDA staff. U.S Food and Drug Administration (2016).
Center for Drug Evaluation & Research. Comparative analyses and related comparative use human factors studies for a drug-device combination product submitted in an ANDA: Draft guidance for industry. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2017).
European Medicines Agency. Quality documentation for medicinal products when used with a medical device—scientific guideline. European Medicines Agency (2022).
Department of Health and Social Care. Guidance on applying human factors and usability engineering to medical devices including drug-device combination products in Great Britain. Medicines, Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (2021).
National Medical Products Association (NMPA). Guiding principles for technical review of human factors design of medical devices [DiMe, Trans.]. Digital Medicine Society (DiMe) (2023).
The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. Regulation—2017/745—EN—medical device regulation. EUR-Lex (2017).
Center for Devices & Radiological Health. Purpose and content of use-related risk analyses for drugs, biological products, and combination products. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2024).
International Organization for Standardization. IEC 62366-1:2015. ISO (2021).
International Organization for Standardization. IEC/TR 62366-2:2016. ISO (2024).
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 9241-210:2019. ISO (2019).
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 20282-1:2006. ISO (2020).
International Organization for Standardization. ISO/TS 20282-2:2013. ISO (2024).
Digital Medicine Society (DiMe). Library of Human Factors Resources for Digital Health Technologies. DATAcc by DiMe (2023).
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14971:2019. ISO (2019).
Zhou, Y. et al. Missing data matter: an empirical evaluation of the impacts of missing EHR data in comparative effectiveness research. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 30, 1246–1256 (2023).
Google Scholar
Flora, C. et al. High-frequency temperature monitoring for early detection of febrile adverse events in patients with cancer. Cancer Cell 39, 1167–1168 (2021).
Google Scholar
Office of Regulatory Affairs. Design controls. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2023).
Bakker, J. P. et al. Regulatory pathways for qualification and acceptance of digital health technology-derived clinical trial endpoints: considerations for sponsors. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. (2024).
Google Scholar
Schaefer, S. E., Van Loan, M. & German, J. B. A feasibility study of wearable activity monitors for pre-adolescent school-age children. Prev. Chronic Dis. 11, E85 (2014).
Google Scholar
Davis, F. D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. (1989).
Google Scholar
Shachak, A., Kuziemsky, C. & Petersen, C. Beyond TAM and UTAUT: future directions for HIT implementation research. J. Biomed. Inform. 100, 103315 (2019).
Google Scholar
Virzi, R. A. Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: how many subjects is enough? Hum. Factors (1992).
Lewis, J. R. Sample sizes for usability studies: additional considerations. Hum. Factors 36, 368–378 (1994).
Google Scholar
Digital Medicine Society (DiMe). DATAcc by DiMe Resources. DATAcc by DiMe (2024).
Duffy, A., Christie, G. J. & Moreno, S. The challenges toward real-world implementation of digital health design approaches: narrative review. JMIR Hum. Factors 9, e35693 (2022).
Google Scholar
Pillalamarri, S. S., Huyett, L. M. & Abdel-Malek, A. Novel bluetooth-enabled tubeless insulin pump: a user experience design approach for a connected digital diabetes management platform. J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. 12, 1132–1142 (2018).
Google Scholar
Stubberud, A., Tronvik, E., Olsen, A., Gravdahl, G. & Linde, M. Biofeedback treatment app for pediatric migraine: development and usability study. Headache 60, 889–901 (2020).
Google Scholar
Domingos, C., Costa, P., Santos, N. C. & Pêgo, J. M. Usability, acceptability, and satisfaction of a wearable activity tracker in older adults: observational study in a real-life context in northern Portugal. J. Med. Internet Res. 24, e26652 (2022).
Google Scholar
Shoemaker, S. J., Wolf, M. S. & Brach, C. Development of the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT): a new measure of understandability and actionability for print and audiovisual patient information. Patient Educ. Couns. 96, 395–403 (2014).
Google Scholar
FDA-NIH Biomarker Working Group. BEST (Biomarkers, EndpointS, and other Tools) Resource (National Library of Medicine, 2016).
FDA-NIH Biomarker Working Group. Glossary. in BEST (Biomarkers, EndpointS, and other Tools) Resource (U.S. Food and Drug Administration and National Institutes of Health, 2021).
Nielsen, J. Usability 101: Introduction to Usability. Nielsen Norman Group (2012).
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Glossary of terms on clinical trials for patient engagement advisory committee meeting. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2017).
Center for Devices & Radiological Health. General/specific intended use–guidance for industry. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2020).
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 13485:2016. ISO (2020).
Schnall, R., Higgins, T., Brown, W., Carballo-Dieguez, A. & Bakken, S. Trust, perceived risk, perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness as factors related to mHealth technology use. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 216, 467 (2015).
Google Scholar
Preusse, K. C., Mitzner, T. L., Fausset, C. B. & Rogers, W. A. Older adults’ acceptance of activity trackers. J. Appl. Gerontol. 36, 127–155 (2017).
Google Scholar
Nielsen, J. Usability Inspection Methods Nielsen Norman Group (John Wiley & Sons, 1994).
IVD Clinical Evidence Working Group. Framework for developing clinical evidence for regulatory and coverage assessments in in vitro diagnostics (IVDs). MDIC (2019).
Fryback, D. G. & Thornbury, J. R. The efficacy of diagnostic imaging. Med. Decis. Mak. 11, 88–94 (1991).
Google Scholar
Haddow, J. E., Palomaki, G. E., Haddow, J. & Palomaki, G. E. ACCE: a model process for evaluating data on emerging genetic tests. (2003).
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. An Evidence Framework for Genetic Testing (The National Academies Press, 2017).
Henni, S. H., Maurud, S., Fuglerud, K. S. & Moen, A. The experiences, needs and barriers of people with impairments related to usability and accessibility of digital health solutions, levels of involvement in the design process and strategies for participatory and universal design: a scoping review. BMC Public Health 22, 35 (2022).
Google Scholar
link
