Bielefeld Pub
metadata only
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
Methodological rigour and risk of bias in the publicly available full-text evidence for permanently approved digital health applications (DiGA): a systematic assessment
Zapp S, von Jan U, Albrecht U-V. Methodological rigour and risk of bias in the publicly available full-text evidence for permanently approved digital health applications (DiGA): a systematic assessment. mHealth. 2026;12.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Assessing the Quality of Evidence Regarding Permanently Listed Digital Health Applications (DiGAs) in Germany: A Scoping Review#622751
- Challenges for the evaluation of digital health solutions—A call for innovative evidence generation approaches#976496
- Digital Health Information Interoperability: Background and Selected Policy Considerations#1161282
- AHRQ-Funded Digital Healthcare Research Grantee Final Reports#1146924
- Digital Health Technologies for Risk Factor Management and Secondary Prevention After Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.#1175688
Record · ID 1461968
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive