Background: Implementation of digital health technologies has grown rapidly, but many remain limited to pilot studies due to challenges, such as a lack of evidence or barriers to implementation. Overcoming these challenges requires learning from previous implementations and systematically documenting implementation processes to better understand the real-world impact of a technology and identify effective strategies for future implementation. Objective: A group of global experts, facilitated by the Geneva Digital Health Hub, developed the Guidelines and Checklist for the Reporting on Digital Health Implementations (iCHECK-DH, pronounced “I checked”) to improve the completeness of reporting on digital health implementations. Methods: A guideline development group was convened to define key considerations and criteria for reporting on digital health implementations. To ensure the practicality and effectiveness of the checklist, it was pilot-tested by applying it to several real-world digital health implementations, and adjustments were made based on the feedback received. The guiding principle for the development of iCHECK-DH was to identify the minimum set of information needed to comprehensively define a digital health implementation, to support the identification of key factors for success and failure, and to enable others to replicate it in different settings. Results: The result was a 20-item checklist with detailed explanations and examples in this paper. The authors anticipate that widespread adoption will standardize the quality of reporting and, indirectly, improve implementation standards and best practices. Conclusions: Guidelines for reporting on digital health implementations are important to ensure the accuracy, completeness, and consistency of reported information. This allows for meaningful comparison and evaluation of results, transparency, and accountability and informs stakeholder decision-making. i-CHECK-DH facilitates standardization of the way information is collected and reported, improving systematic documentation and knowledge transfer that can lead to the development of more effective digital health interventions and better health outcomes.

Introduction: Gaps in the disease knowledge of People with Haemophilia (PWH) in Senegal are important barriers to the effective management of haemophilia. Digital health systems for chronic diseases in low‐ and middle‐income countries are suggested to improve education and self‐management. Artificial Intelligence (AI) chatbots could improve knowledge and support symptom monitoring.Aim: Development process and usability testing of an AI chatbot to assess its future adoption in Senegal.Methods: An AI chatbot prototype was designed based on a multilingual conversational engine using Natural Language Processing. A sequential mixed method was used including a co‐creative design process with a task force made up of PWH and medical doctors. Usability was assessed through the System Usability Scale (SUS) questionnaire.Results: An AI chatbot in French and Wolof, named Saytù Hemophilie, was developed for Android and Apple iOS devices. It was assessed as a very usable system with a SUS score of 81.7, above average. 42% would prefer to use the Wolof version even if they were very satisfied with the French version. The level of Wolof in the app did not always correspond to users’ levels. Participants praised its accessibility and reliability, and its ability to enhance self‐learning.Conclusions: Findings suggest that a culturally adapted digital conversational agent is likely to be used by PWH in Senegal and their families to improve education and self‐management of haemophilia. Relevance and impact are foreseen for other communities in Africa and beyond.

The COVID-19 outbreak is a global health concern. Understanding the transmission modes of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is key to limit the spread of the pandemic. A lack of knowledge about the possibility of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and infection through contaminated surfaces is noticeable and recent studies have stated conflicting findings. This scoping review aims to understand the risks of contaminations via fomites better. Relevant publications were selected through Google Scholar, Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Cochrane Library, with related keywords. PRISMA-ScR guidelines were followed. Out of the 565 articles found, exclusion criteria were applied, duplicates removed, and a total of 25 articles were finally included in the study. The included documents were assessed by the contamination risk: “low” (37.5%), “high” (16.7%), “plausible” (8.3%), “unlikely” (8.3%) risk, and “insufficient evidence” (29.2%). Research in hospital settings was found as the main setting in the reviewed papers, which precisely indicated the risk of contaminated surfaces. This scoping review underscores the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection via contaminated surfaces assessed as low in the majority of the reviewed articles. Further evaluation of the risk of the virus transmission by fomites and providing adequate information on its infectivity via contaminated surfaces in real-life conditions is essential.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/46694.].

BACKGROUND Implementation of digital health technologies has grown rapidly, but many remain limited to pilot studies due to challenges, such as a lack of evidence or barriers to implementation. Overcoming these challenges requires learning from previous implementations and systematically documenting implementation processes to better understand the real-world impact of a technology and identify effective strategies for future implementation. OBJECTIVE A group of global experts, facilitated by the Geneva Digital Health Hub, developed the Guidelines and Checklist for the Reporting on Digital Health Implementations (iCHECK-DH, pronounced “I checked”) to improve the completeness of reporting on digital health implementations. METHODS A guideline development group was convened to define key considerations and criteria for reporting on digital health implementations. To ensure the practicality and effectiveness of the checklist, it was pilot-tested by applying it to several real-world digital health implementations, and adjustments were made based on the feedback received. The guiding principle for the development of iCHECK-DH was to identify the minimum set of information needed to comprehensively define a digital health implementation, to support the identification of key factors for success and failure, and to enable others to replicate it in different settings. RESULTS The result was a 20-item checklist with detailed explanations and examples in this paper. The authors anticipate that widespread adoption will standardize the quality of reporting and, indirectly, improve implementation standards and best practices. CONCLUSIONS Guidelines for reporting on digital health implementations are important to ensure the accuracy, completeness, and consistency of reported information. This allows for meaningful comparison and evaluation of results, transparency, and accountability and informs stakeholder decision-making. i-CHECK-DH facilitates standardization of the way information is collected and reported, improving systematic documentation and knowledge transfer that can lead to the development of more effective digital health interventions and better health outcomes.