mPATH is built on NCI-funded research and validated in randomized controlled trials published in the world's leading medical journals. Below is the evidence.
Large randomized controlled trial of 26,000+ adults across two health systems. 1,333 enrolled who met CMS criteria. mPATH-Lung achieved a 57% increase in screening completion. Increased screening across racial, socioeconomic, and rural-urban groups.
Miller DP, Snavely AC, Dharod A, et al. JAMA. Published November 2025.
View AbstractRCT in 6 community practices with 450 patients. 30% completed screening vs. 15% usual care. Half of participants had incomes below $20K. 53% of participants self-ordered their tests without provider involvement.
Miller DP, Denizard-Thompson N, et al. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2018;168(8):550-557.
View AbstractQualitative study of 48 clinic staff on implementation factors. Findings informed mPATH's shift to direct-to-patient delivery outside clinic settings, reducing friction and improving reach.
Puccinelli-Ortega N, et al. Applied Clinical Informatics. 2022;13(1):1-9.
View AbstractStudy of 1,000 patients sent portal message. 40% visited mPATH, and 86% of those who visited completed the full program, demonstrating high engagement and completion rates.
Dharod A, et al. Applied Clinical Informatics. 2019.
View AbstractAnalysis showing EHR data identified only 35% of eligible patients vs. patient self-report in mPATH. Highlights critical value of collecting screening eligibility information directly from patients rather than relying on incomplete clinical records.
Patel N, Miller DP, et al. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2020;58(4):591-595.
View AbstractStudy of 92% of patients rating mPATH highly for ease of use, including patients with limited health literacy. Demonstrates accessibility across literacy levels.
Miller DP, et al. JMIR mHealth and uHealth. 2017;5(4):e43.
View AbstractRCT of 264 patients using decision aids. Users were significantly more likely to express screening preference (84% vs. 55%) and report readiness to screen (52% vs. 20%) compared to usual care.
Miller DP, et al. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2011;40(6):608-15.
View AbstractReanalyzed NLST data from 53,452 patients. Benefits and harms of screening vary significantly by individual risk. Findings informed mPATH's development of personalized risk models and decision algorithms.
Bellinger CR, et al. Annals of the American Thoracic Society. 2019;16(4):512-514.
View AbstractAnalysis of false-positive rates in lung cancer screening across risk groups (12.9%–25.9%). Underscores the need for personalized decision tools that account for individual risk, not one-size-fits-all recommendations.
Pinsky PF, Bellinger CR, Miller DP. Journal of Medical Screening. 2018;25(2):110-112.
View AbstractQualitative research on text message design and messaging strategy. Patients respond most to clear, friendly, and reassuring messages. Findings shaped the behavioral design of mPATH's communication strategy.
Weaver KE, et al. JMIR mHealth uHealth. 2015;3(4):e100.
View AbstractFirst study examining provider low-dose CT screening practices post-guideline launch. Only 12% of eligible patients had LDCT ordered. Highlighted the critical need for patient-directed screening tools.
Lewis JA, et al. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention. 2015;24(4):664-70.
View AbstractStudy showing 56% of patients had limited health literacy, yet most completed the digital program without help. Patients with limited literacy actually learned more from digital tools compared to traditional brochures.
Duren-Winfield V, et al. Journal of Health Communication. 2015;20(4):491-8.
View AbstractRCT of 204 adults comparing computer-based education with nurse counseling. Computer-based education matched nurse counseling for screening completion (62% vs. 63%), demonstrating digital scalability.
Miller DP, et al. Journal of General Internal Medicine. 2005;20:984-8.
View AbstractAs a physician at Wake Forest with a background in computing, Dr. David Miller grew frustrated by how little medicine had embraced technology to improve care quality and close health equity gaps.
Miller and colleague Dr. Ajay Dharod built the first mPATH prototype — an iPad decision aid that identified patients due for colorectal cancer screening and educated them at the point of care.
NCI-funded randomized controlled trials showed mPATH doubled screening completion rates across all demographics — regardless of race, income, or literacy level.
Miller and Dharod spun mPATH Health out of Wake Forest, securing $3M in NCI grants and venture funding to bring the platform to health systems nationwide.
Dr. Miller is a recognized pioneer in digital health with $8M+ in NIH funding and 3,000+ academic citations.
Request a summary of published evidence tailored to your screening program.