IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i22p15115-d974595.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Health Recommender Systems Development, Usage, and Evaluation from 2010 to 2022: A Scoping Review

Author

Listed:
  • Yao Cai

    (School of Information and Library Science, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA
    School of Economics and Management, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing 210094, China)

  • Fei Yu

    (School of Information and Library Science, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA
    Carolina Health Informatics Program, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA)

  • Manish Kumar

    (Public Health Leadership Program, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA)

  • Roderick Gladney

    (Carolina Health Informatics Program, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA)

  • Javed Mostafa

    (School of Information and Library Science, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA
    Carolina Health Informatics Program, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA)

Abstract

A health recommender system (HRS) provides a user with personalized medical information based on the user’s health profile. This scoping review aims to identify and summarize the HRS development in the most recent decade by focusing on five key aspects: health domain, user, recommended item, recommendation technology, and system evaluation. We searched PubMed, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, Web of Science, and Scopus databases for English literature published between 2010 and 2022. Our study selection and data extraction followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. The following are the primary results: sixty-three studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the data analysis. These studies involved twenty-four health domains, with both patients and the general public as target users and ten major recommended items. The most adopted algorithm of recommendation technologies was the knowledge-based approach. In addition, fifty-nine studies reported system evaluations, in which two types of evaluation methods and three categories of metrics were applied. However, despite existing research progress on HRSs, the health domains, recommended items, and sample size of system evaluation have been limited. In the future, HRS research shall focus on dynamic user modelling, utilizing open-source knowledge bases, and evaluating the efficacy of HRSs using a large sample size. In conclusion, this study summarized the research activities and evidence pertinent to HRSs in the most recent ten years and identified gaps in the existing research landscape. Further work shall address the gaps and continue improving the performance of HRSs to empower users in terms of healthcare decision making and self-management.

Suggested Citation

  • Yao Cai & Fei Yu & Manish Kumar & Roderick Gladney & Javed Mostafa, 2022. "Health Recommender Systems Development, Usage, and Evaluation from 2010 to 2022: A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-15, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:22:p:15115-:d:974595
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/22/15115/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/22/15115/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yaroslava Robles-Bykbaev & Christian Oyola-Flores & Vladimir Espartaco Robles-Bykbaev & Martín López-Nores & Paola Ingavélez-Guerra & José Juan Pazos-Arias & Fernando Pesántez-Avilés & Manuel Ramos-Ca, 2019. "A Bespoke Social Network for Deaf Women in Ecuador to Access Information on Sexual and Reproductive Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-17, October.
    2. Andreas Meier & Luis Terán, 2019. "eDemocracy & eGovernment," Progress in IS, Springer, edition 2, number 978-3-030-17585-6, February.
    3. Martin Wiesner & Daniel Pfeifer, 2014. "Health Recommender Systems: Concepts, Requirements, Technical Basics and Challenges," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-28, March.
    4. Hoill Jung & Kyungyong Chung, 2016. "Knowledge-based dietary nutrition recommendation for obese management," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 29-42, March.
    5. Martin Michalowski & Szymon Wilk & Wojtek Michalowski & Dympna O’Sullivan & Silvia Bonaccio & Enea Parimbelli & Marc Carrier & Grégoire Le Gal & Stephen Kingwell & Mor Peleg, 2021. "A Health eLearning Ontology and Procedural Reasoning Approach for Developing Personalized Courses to Teach Patients about Their Medical Condition and Treatment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(14), pages 1-28, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Claudio Costantino & Alessandra Casuccio & Vincenzo Restivo, 2020. "Potential Risks and Factors of Women’s Health Promotion," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-7, December.
    2. Wei Lu & Yunkai Zhai, 2022. "Self-Adaptive Telemedicine Specialist Recommendation Considering Specialist Activity and Patient Feedback," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-22, May.
    3. Bel Hadj Tarek & Ghodbane Adel & Aouadi Sami, 2016. "Business Intelligence Versus Competitive Intelligence in the Case of North African SMEs," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(04), pages 1-21, December.
    4. Akeem Pedro & Anh-Tuan Pham-Hang & Phong Thanh Nguyen & Hai Chien Pham, 2022. "Data-Driven Construction Safety Information Sharing System Based on Linked Data, Ontologies, and Knowledge Graph Technologies," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(2), pages 1-18, January.
    5. Yun-Hong Noh & Ji-Yun Seo & Do-Un Jeong, 2020. "Development of a Knowledge Discovery Computing based wearable ECG monitoring system," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 205-216, December.
    6. Vanderlei Carneiro Silva & Bartira Gorgulho & Dirce Maria Marchioni & Sheila Maria Alvim & Luana Giatti & Tânia Aparecida de Araujo & Angelica Castilho Alonso & Itamar de Souza Santos & Paulo Andrade , 2022. "Recommender System Based on Collaborative Filtering for Personalized Dietary Advice: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of the ELSA-Brasil Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-12, November.
    7. Joo-Chang Kim & Kyungyong Chung, 2020. "Knowledge-based hybrid decision model using neural network for nutrition management," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 29-39, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:22:p:15115-:d:974595. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.