Evaluation is crucial for integration of e-Health/m-Health applications into healthcare systems and their further sustainability. However, evaluation of these technologies is often challenged by poor quality of research design, lack of common outcome indicators and no consensus on appropriate methodology. Health Technology Assessment (HTA) could offer a sound methodological basis for these evaluations (1). The aim of this study was to look for HTA reports on e-Health/m-Health technologies and to describe their characteristics and analyze transparency, consistency and thoroughness, with the goal to detect fields for improvements.

A literature search was performed on PubMed, ISI WOS and University of York – Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) electronic databases, in order to identify reports that had evaluated e-Health/m-Health technologies, published until 1 April 2016. We used the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) checklist (2) to evaluate transparency and consistency of included reports. We also assessed thoroughness of reports by checking the presence of the domains suggested by European Network for HTA (EUnetHTA) HTA Core Model (3).

Twenty-eight reports published between 1999 and 2015 were included. Most of reports (71.4 percent) were delivered by non-European countries and only 35.7 percent were classified as full reports. E-Health/m-Health technologies from several fields of medicine, mostly cardiology (21.4 percent) and psychiatry (17.9 percent) were evaluated. Policy question was clearly defined in 32.1 percent of reports, whereas ethical (21.4 percent) and legal implications (3.6 percent) were domains with the least presence. With respect to the EUnetHTA Core Model, around 70 percent of reports dealt with effectiveness and economic evaluation, more than 50 percent described health problem and around 40 percent organizational and social aspects. Remaining domains were evaluated in very few reports.

E-Health/m-Health technologies are increasingly present in the field of HTA. Our work identified a number of elements not being included in the available reports. Several reports missed to respond to relevant assessment elements especially ethical, social and organizational implications. There is a need for strengthening and standardizing methods used for the evaluation of these technologies.