The scoping review methodology, as outlined by Arksey and O’Malley and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) [16,17], is an appropriate approach for mapping DHIs. Scoping reviews allow flexibility when exploring the diverse and heterogenous field of digital health, are appropriate when using different sources of data (eg, peer-reviewed journals, gray literature, and expert opinions), and permit inclusion and exclusion criteria to be iteratively refined as more evidence is uncovered [16-19]. Additionally, the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) [20] will be followed to ensure adherence to methodological standards.

This scoping review will seek to answer the following research questions:

To identify relevant literature, academic databases will be searched along with key websites, repositories, and gray literature databases that may contain relevant information for our scoping review. Textbox 1 shows the proposed databases.

The search strategy has been initially drafted for MEDLINE in the Ovid platform (Textbox 2) and will be adapted for the remaining databases. The search strategy has been iteratively developed and refined by the authors’ input and the librarian at the University of Edinburgh. The terms “respiratory health,” “digital health,” “South Asia,” and “Southeast Asia,” as well as all relevant variations of these terms have been included in the search strategy to gather as much pertinent literature and information as possible.

Exclusion and inclusion criteria have been developed according to the domains of population, concept, context, and type of evidence, suggested by the JBI [17,18]. Additionally, an “other variables” category has been created to include year, language, and format criteria (Table 1). The regions of South and Southeast Asia include 19 countries as established by the United Nations Statistics Division [21]. These 2 regions have been chosen because they contain all the RESPIRE2 countries. Multicountry studies containing countries from the selected regions and other regions of the world will be included in the initial screening and only excluded if they do not provide the data of interest separate for each country. Only studies in English and those published in the last 10 years (since 2013) will be included to keep the scope of this review within manageable boundaries.

For information found in a scientific study format, Covidence software [22] will be used to eliminate duplicates and carry out screening and extraction. After deduplication, title, abstract, and full-text screening will be done by 2 authors according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Discrepancies will be first addressed by consensus between those 2 authors. If there is a lack of consensus, a third reviewer will decide.

For all other types of information or data found from searches, manual screening by 1 reviewer will happen first. Relevant data will be entered into a spreadsheet, and a second reviewer will assess it. Discrepancies will first be addressed between both reviewers, and if there is no consensus, a third reviewer will make the final decision. We will not contact authors directly to further understand whether a study should be included since it would most likely significantly lengthen the timeline for this scoping review.

Scoping reviews use secondary data and do not require ethics approval under RESPIRE rules. However, the authors will adhere to the highest ethical standards when carrying out the review. This protocol establishes a transparent and reproducible study design, which limits the potential for personal bias [23].

After selection, relevant data will be extracted to a spreadsheet using Covidence. The extraction form will be first piloted in 3-5 studies to assess if it is fit for purpose as recommended by the JBI. Data selected from a nonscientific study format will be entered into the extraction spreadsheet as accurately as possible. However, it is acknowledged that not all fields may contain relevant information, and some fields may need to be modified (eg, data from the Digital Health Atlas will have a “source of information” field instead of an “author” field).

When 2 or more articles refer to the same overall study, those articles will be grouped as one before data extraction.

After data analysis, the data will be collated and analyzed as follows:

Consultation with stakeholders will be ongoing throughout the scoping review process. We will disseminate early findings among partners so that they can provide feedback on findings and that feedback can be incorporated into the discussion.

Through this scoping review, we will seek to better understand what digital health tools and technologies are being used in South and Southeast Asia for respiratory health and to what extent they are addressing the respiratory health needs of the region. The results will inform recommendations on digital health tools for respiratory health in South and Southeast Asia and will help funders and implementers of DHIs leverage existing technologies and accelerate innovations that address documented gaps in the studied countries. The results of this review will be limited by the fact that only studies in English and studies published in the last 10 years will be included. This review will enhance the knowledge of digital health tools and technologies in the region, which is paramount before undertaking any new initiative, as it helps prevent redundant work and investment by building on existing systems and lessons learned.

As DHIs, in general and in respiratory health in particular, continue to proliferate, the need to understand the current landscape becomes more pertinent. Through this scoping review, we will systematically map out DHIs, which serves as the required first step in any well-informed and thought-out design and deployment of DHIs.