“…Of the 179 interventions, 8 (4%) focused only on secondary prevention, as digital screening and surveillance programs [ 48 , 61 , 153 , 161 , 171 , 194 , 201 , 219 ], and 3 (2%) improved the health of patients who were chronically ill on a tertiary prevention level [ 103 , 147 , 202 ]. In contrast, of all included 179 interventions, 10 (6%) were established for primary health care purposes only [ 49 , 67 , 79 , 109 , 124 , 172 , 178 , 186 , 210 , 212 , 228 , 229 ], 17 (9%) were designed for secondary health care through specialists or emergency use cases [ 52 , 54 , 60 , 65 , 78 , 83 , 88 , 95 , 134 , 135 , 173 - 175 , 179 , 189 , 193 , 216 ], and 5 (3%) aimed at tertiary health care in hospital settings [ 70 , 109 , 132 , 157 , 200 ]. Figure 5 gives an overview of the relative size of each target group and the addressed level of prevention, health care, or research per intervention setting.…”