Assessing the Quality of Evidence Regarding Permanently Listed Digital Health Applications (DiGAs) in Germany: A Scoping Review

Background/Objectives: Germany’s 2019 Digital Healthcare Act allows manufacturers to integrate digital health applications (DiGAs) into statutory health insurance if they demonstrate a medical benefit or patient-relevant structural or procedural improvement, substantiated by comparative studies. However, existing reviews indicate that the quality of evidence in these studies is inconsistent. Methods: A scoping review following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines was conducted using MEDLINE on 16 December 2024, via PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Studies published between 2020 and 2024 assessing DiGA evaluation tools, study quality, and the strength of evidence were included, while non-DiGA studies, telemedicine research, and register-based studies were excluded. Results: Out of the 4628 publications screened, 16 met the inclusion criteria. Across the nine dimensions of evidence quality, deficits were most frequently identified in relation to validity (nine publications), transparency (seven), objectivity (six), consistency (five), and reliability (five), followed by relevance, generalizability, and accuracy (four each) and timeliness (two). Conclusions: The findings highlight substantial limitations in the quality of DiGA studies, including high dropout rates, a lack of blinding, gender imbalance, a high risk of bias, small sample sizes, and biased control-group designs. Additionally, DiGA usage durations were often shorter than recommended. Strengthening the evidence base for DiGAs requires balancing methodological rigor with the practical realities of digital health development. Sustainable integration into routine care depends on feasible evaluation pathways that enable continuous, real-world evidence generation and address the financial and operational challenges of high-quality evaluations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Healthcare
Published
2026-07-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare14152279
Primary Topic
Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Assessing the Quality of Evidence Regarding Permanently Listed Digital Health Applications (DiGAs) in Germany: A Scoping Review

Ute von Jan, Urs‐Vito Albrecht, Sebastian Zapp, Annabelle Mielitz
Healthcare
Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
article

Assessing the Quality of Evidence Regarding Permanently Listed Digital Health Applications (DiGAs) in Germany: A Scoping Review

Ute von Jan, Urs‐Vito Albrecht, Sebastian Zapp, Annabelle Mielitz
article en

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Germany’s 2019 Digital Healthcare Act allows manufacturers to integrate digital health applications (DiGAs) into statutory health insurance if they demonstrate a medical benefit or patient-relevant structural or procedural improvement, substantiated by comparative studies. However, existing reviews indicate that the quality of evidence in these studies is inconsistent. Methods: A scoping review following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines was conducted using MEDLINE on 16 December 2024, via PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Studies published between 2020 and 2024 assessing DiGA evaluation tools, study quality, and the strength of evidence were included, while non-DiGA studies, telemedicine research, and register-based studies were excluded. Results: Out of the 4628 publications screened, 16 met the inclusion criteria. Across the nine dimensions of evidence quality, deficits were most frequently identified in relation to validity (nine publications), transparency (seven), objectivity (six), consistency (five), and reliability (five), followed by relevance, generalizability, and accuracy (four each) and timeliness (two). Conclusions: The findings highlight substantial limitations in the quality of DiGA studies, including high dropout rates, a lack of blinding, gender imbalance, a high risk of bias, small sample sizes, and biased control-group designs. Additionally, DiGA usage durations were often shorter than recommended. Strengthening the evidence base for DiGAs requires balancing methodological rigor with the practical realities of digital health development. Sustainable integration into routine care depends on feasible evaluation pathways that enable continuous, real-world evidence generation and address the financial and operational challenges of high-quality evaluations.

HealthcareVol. 14(15)
Bielefeld University (DE), Hochschule Bielefeld (DE), Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (DE)
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Universität Bielefeld
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.