scholarly journals Vaping-Related Mobile Apps Available in the Google Play Store After the Apple Ban: Content Review

10.2196/20009 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (11) ◽  
pp. e20009
Author(s):  
Meredith C Meacham ◽  
Erin A Vogel ◽  
Johannes Thrul

Background In response to health concerns about vaping devices (eg, youth nicotine use, lung injury), Apple removed 181 previously approved vaping-related apps from the App Store in November 2019. This policy change may lessen youth exposure to content that glamorizes vaping; however, it may also block important sources of information and vaping device control for adults seeking to use vaping devices safely. Objective Understanding the types of nicotine and cannabis vaping–related apps still available in the competing Google Play Store can shed light on how digital apps may reflect information available to consumers. Methods In December 2019, we searched the Google Play Store for vaping-related apps using the keywords "vape" and "vaping" and reviewed the first 100 apps presented in the results. We reviewed app titles, descriptions, screenshots, and metadata to categorize the intended substance (nicotine or cannabis/tetrahydrocannabinol) and the app’s purpose. The most installed apps in each purpose category were downloaded and evaluated for quality and usability with the Mobile App Rating Scale. Results Of the first 100 apps, 79 were related to vaping. Of these 79 apps, 43 (54%) were specific to nicotine, 3 (4%) were specific to cannabis, 1 (1%) was intended for either, and for the remaining 31 (39%), the intended substance was unclear. The most common purposes of the apps were making do-it-yourself e-liquids (28/79, 35%) or coils (25/79, 32%), games/entertainment (19/79, 24%), social networking (16/79, 20%), and shopping for vaping products (15/79, 19%). Of the 79 apps, at least 4 apps (5%) paired with vaping devices to control temperature or dose settings, 8 apps (10%) claimed to help people quit smoking using vaping, and 2 apps (3%) had the goal of helping people quit vaping. Conclusions The majority of vaping-related apps in the Google Play Store had features either to help users continue vaping, such as information for modifying devices, or to maintain interest in vaping. Few apps were for controlling device settings or assisting with quitting smoking or vaping. Assuming that these Google Play Store apps were similar in content to the Apple App Store apps that were removed, it appears that Apple’s ban would have a minimal effect on people who vape with the intention of quitting smoking or who are seeking information about safer vaping via mobile apps.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meredith C Meacham ◽  
Erin A Vogel ◽  
Johannes Thrul

BACKGROUND In response to health concerns about vaping devices (eg, youth nicotine use, lung injury), Apple removed 181 previously approved vaping-related apps from the App Store in November 2019. This policy change may lessen youth exposure to content that glamorizes vaping; however, it may also block important sources of information and vaping device control for adults seeking to use vaping devices safely. OBJECTIVE Understanding the types of nicotine and cannabis vaping–related apps still available in the competing Google Play Store can shed light on how digital apps may reflect information available to consumers. METHODS In December 2019, we searched the Google Play Store for vaping-related apps using the keywords "vape" and "vaping" and reviewed the first 100 apps presented in the results. We reviewed app titles, descriptions, screenshots, and metadata to categorize the intended substance (nicotine or cannabis/tetrahydrocannabinol) and the app’s purpose. The most installed apps in each purpose category were downloaded and evaluated for quality and usability with the Mobile App Rating Scale. RESULTS Of the first 100 apps, 79 were related to vaping. Of these 79 apps, 43 (54%) were specific to nicotine, 3 (4%) were specific to cannabis, 1 (1%) was intended for either, and for the remaining 31 (39%), the intended substance was unclear. The most common purposes of the apps were making do-it-yourself e-liquids (28/79, 35%) or coils (25/79, 32%), games/entertainment (19/79, 24%), social networking (16/79, 20%), and shopping for vaping products (15/79, 19%). Of the 79 apps, at least 4 apps (5%) paired with vaping devices to control temperature or dose settings, 8 apps (10%) claimed to help people quit smoking using vaping, and 2 apps (3%) had the goal of helping people quit vaping. CONCLUSIONS The majority of vaping-related apps in the Google Play Store had features either to help users continue vaping, such as information for modifying devices, or to maintain interest in vaping. Few apps were for controlling device settings or assisting with quitting smoking or vaping. Assuming that these Google Play Store apps were similar in content to the Apple App Store apps that were removed, it appears that Apple’s ban would have a minimal effect on people who vape with the intention of quitting smoking or who are seeking information about safer vaping via mobile apps.


10.2196/18858 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. e18858
Author(s):  
Atiyeh Vaezipour ◽  
Jessica Campbell ◽  
Deborah Theodoros ◽  
Trevor Russell

Background Worldwide, more than 75% of people with acquired brain injury (ABI) experience communication disorders. Communication disorders are impairments in the ability to communicate effectively, that is, sending, receiving, processing, and comprehending verbal and nonverbal concepts and symbols. Such disorders may have enduring impacts on employment, social participation, and quality of life. Technology-enabled interventions such as mobile apps have the potential to increase the reach of speech-language therapy to treat communication disorders. However, ensuring that apps are evidence-based and of high quality is critical for facilitating safe and effective treatment for adults with communication disorders. Objective The aim of this review is to identify mobile apps that are currently widely available to adults with communication disorders for speech-language therapy and to assess their content and quality using the validated Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS). Methods Google Play Store, Apple App Store, and webpages were searched to identify mobile apps for speech-language therapy. Apps were included in the review if they were designed for the treatment of adult communication disorders after ABI, were in English, and were either free or for purchase. Certified speech-language pathologists used the MARS to assess the quality of the apps. Results From a total of 2680 apps identified from Google Play Store, Apple App Store, and web searches, 2.61% (70/2680) apps met the eligibility criteria for inclusion. Overall, 61% (43/70) were available for download on the iPhone Operating System (iOS) platform, 20% (14/70) on the Android platform, and 19% (13/70) on both iOS and Android platforms. A content analysis of the apps revealed 43 apps for language, 17 apps for speech, 8 apps for cognitive communication, 6 apps for voice, and 5 apps for oromotor function or numeracy. The overall MARS mean score was 3.7 out of 5, SD 0.6, ranging between 2.1 and 4.5, with functionality being the highest-scored subscale (4.3, SD 0.6), followed by aesthetics (3.8, SD 0.8), information (3.4, SD 0.6), and engagement (3.3, SD 0.6). The top 5 apps were Naming Therapy (4.6/5), Speech Flipbook Standard (4.6/5), Number Therapy (4.5/5), Answering Therapy, and Constant Therapy (4.4/5). Conclusions To our knowledge, this is the first study to systematically identify and evaluate a broad range of mobile apps for speech-language therapy for adults with communication disorders after sustaining ABI. We found a lack of interactive and engaging elements in the apps, a critical factor in sustaining self-managed speech-language therapy. More evidence-based apps with a focus on human factors, user experience, and a patient-led design approach are required to enhance effectiveness and long-term use.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Atiyeh Vaezipour ◽  
Jessica Campbell ◽  
Deborah Theodoros ◽  
Trevor Russell

BACKGROUND Worldwide, more than 75% of people with acquired brain injury (ABI) experience communication disorders. Communication disorders are impairments in the ability to communicate effectively, that is, sending, receiving, processing, and comprehending verbal and nonverbal concepts and symbols. Such disorders may have enduring impacts on employment, social participation, and quality of life. Technology-enabled interventions such as mobile apps have the potential to increase the reach of speech-language therapy to treat communication disorders. However, ensuring that apps are evidence-based and of high quality is critical for facilitating safe and effective treatment for adults with communication disorders. OBJECTIVE The aim of this review is to identify mobile apps that are currently widely available to adults with communication disorders for speech-language therapy and to assess their content and quality using the validated Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS). METHODS Google Play Store, Apple App Store, and webpages were searched to identify mobile apps for speech-language therapy. Apps were included in the review if they were designed for the treatment of adult communication disorders after ABI, were in English, and were either free or for purchase. Certified speech-language pathologists used the MARS to assess the quality of the apps. RESULTS From a total of 2680 apps identified from Google Play Store, Apple App Store, and web searches, 2.61% (70/2680) apps met the eligibility criteria for inclusion. Overall, 61% (43/70) were available for download on the iPhone Operating System (iOS) platform, 20% (14/70) on the Android platform, and 19% (13/70) on both iOS and Android platforms. A content analysis of the apps revealed 43 apps for <i>language</i>, 17 apps for <i>speech</i>, 8 apps for <i>cognitive communication</i>, 6 apps for <i>voice</i>, and 5 apps for <i>oromotor function</i> or <i>numeracy</i>. The overall MARS mean score was 3.7 out of 5, SD 0.6, ranging between 2.1 and 4.5, with <i>functionality</i> being the highest-scored subscale (4.3, SD 0.6)<i>, followed by aesthetics</i> (3.8, SD 0.8), <i>information</i> (3.4, SD 0.6)<i>, and engagement</i> (3.3, SD 0.6). The top 5 apps were <i>Naming Therapy</i> (4.6/5), <i>Speech Flipbook Standard</i> (4.6/5), <i>Number Therapy</i> (4.5/5), <i>Answering Therapy</i>, and <i>Constant Therapy</i> (4.4/5). CONCLUSIONS To our knowledge, this is the first study to systematically identify and evaluate a broad range of mobile apps for speech-language therapy for adults with communication disorders after sustaining ABI. We found a lack of interactive and engaging elements in the apps, a critical factor in sustaining self-managed speech-language therapy. More evidence-based apps with a focus on human factors, user experience, and a patient-led design approach are required to enhance effectiveness and long-term use.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Atiyeh Vaezipour ◽  
Jessica Campbell ◽  
Deborah Theodoros ◽  
Trevor Russell

UNSTRUCTURED Worldwide, more than 75% of people with acquired brain injury (ABI) experience communication disorders. Communication disorders are impairments in the ability to communicate effectively, that is, sending, receiving, processing, and comprehending verbal and nonverbal concepts and symbols. Such disorders may have enduring impacts on employment, social participation, and quality of life. Technology-enabled interventions such as mobile apps have the potential to increase the reach of speech-language therapy to treat communication disorders. However, ensuring that apps are evidence-based and of high quality is critical for facilitating safe and effective treatment for adults with communication disorders. The aim of this review is to identify mobile apps that are currently widely available to adults with communication disorders for speech-language therapy and to assess their content and quality using the validated Mobile App Rating Scale(MARS). Google Play Store, Apple App Store, and webpages were searched to identify mobile apps for speech-language therapy. Apps were included in the review if they were designed for the treatment of adult communication disorders after ABI, were in English, and were either free or for purchase. Certified speech-language pathologists used the MARS to assess the quality of the apps. From a total of 2680 apps identified from Google Play Store, Apple App Store, and web searches, 2.61% (70/2680) apps met the eligibility criteria for inclusion. Overall, 61% (43/70) were available for download on the iPhone Operating System (iOS) platform, 20% (14/70) on the Android platform, and 19% (13/70) on both iOS and Android platforms. A content analysis of the apps revealed 43 apps for language, 17 apps for speech, 8 apps for cognitive communication, 6 apps for voice, and 5 apps for oromotor function or numeracy. The overall MARS mean score was 3.7 out of 5, SD 0.6, ranging between 2.1 and 4.5, with functionality being the highest-scored subscale (4.3, SD 0.6), followed by aesthetics (3.8, SD 0.8), information (3.4, SD 0.6), and engagement (3.3, SD 0.6). The top 5 apps were Naming Therapy (4.6/5), Speech Flipbook Standard (4.6/5), Number Therapy(4.5/5), Answering Therapy, and Constant Therapy (4.4/5). To our knowledge, this is the first study to systematically identify and evaluate a broad range of mobile apps for speech-language therapy for adults with communication disorders after sustaining ABI. We found a lack of interactive and engaging elements in the apps, a critical factor in sustaining self-managed speech-language therapy. More evidence-based apps with a focus on human factors, user experience, and a patient-led design approach are required to enhance effectiveness and long-term use.


10.2196/18495 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. e18495 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lindsay M Bearne ◽  
Mandeep Sekhon ◽  
Rebecca Grainger ◽  
Anthony La ◽  
Mehrdad Shamali ◽  
...  

Background Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a disabling, inflammatory joint condition affecting 0.5%-1% of the global population. Physical activity (PA) and exercise are recommended for people with RA, but uptake and adherence tend to be low. Smartphone apps could assist people with RA to achieve PA recommendations. However, it is not known whether high quality, evidence-informed PA apps that include behavior change techniques (BCTs) previously identified as effective for PA adherence are available for people with RA. Objective This study aims to systematically identify apps that include goals to facilitate PA for adults with RA and assess app quality and content for the inclusion of relevant BCTs against recommendations for cardiorespiratory, resistance, flexibility, and neuromotor PA and exercise. Methods A systematic search of the Apple App Store and Google Play Store in the United Kingdom was conducted to identify English language apps that promote PA for adults with RA. Two researchers independently assessed app quality (mobile app rating scale [MARS]; range 0-5) and content (BCT Taxonomy version 1, World Health Organization, the American College of Sports Medicine, and the European League against Rheumatism recommendations for PA). The completeness of reporting of PA prescription was evaluated using a modified version of the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT; range 0-14). Results A total of 14,047 apps were identified. Following deduplication, 2737 apps were screened for eligibility; 6 apps were downloaded (2 on the Apple App Store and 4 on the Google Play Store), yielding 4 unique apps. App quality varied (MARS score 2.25-4.17). Only 1 app was congruent with all aspects of the PA recommendations. All apps completely or partially recommended flexibility and resistance exercises, 3 apps completely or partially advised some form of neuromotor exercise, but only 2 offered full or partial guidance on cardiorespiratory exercise. Completeness of exercise reporting was mixed (CERT scores 7-14 points) and 3-7 BCTs were identified. Two BCTs were common to all apps (information about health consequences and instruction on how to perform behavior). Higher quality apps included a greater number of BCTs and were more closely aligned to PA guidance. No published trials evaluating the effect of the included apps were identified. Conclusions This review identifies 4 PA apps of mixed quality and content for use by people with RA. Higher quality apps were more closely aligned to PA guidance and included a greater number of BCTs. One high-quality app (Rheumatoid Arthritis Information Support and Education) included 7 BCTs and was fully aligned with PA and exercise guidance. The effect of apps on PA adherence should be established before implementation.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole E Werner ◽  
Janetta C Brown ◽  
Priya Loganathar ◽  
Richard J Holden

BACKGROUND The over 11 million care partners in the US who provide care to people living with Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias (ADRD) cite persistent and pervasive unmet needs related to all aspects of their caregiving role. The proliferation of mobile applications (apps) for care partners has potential to meet the care partners’ needs, but the quality of apps is unknown. OBJECTIVE The present study aimed to 1) evaluate the quality of publicly available apps for care partners of people living with ADRD and 2) identify design features of low- and high-quality apps to guide future research and app development. METHODS We searched the US Apple and Google Play app stores with the criteria that the app needed to be 1) available in US Google play or Apple app stores, 2) directly accessible to users “out of the box”, 3) primarily intended for use by an informal (family, friend) caregiver or caregivers of a person with dementia. The included apps were then evaluated using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS), which includes descriptive app classification and rating using 23 items across five dimensions: engagement, functionality, aesthetics, information, and subjective quality. Next, we computed descriptive statistics for each rating. To identify recommendations for future research and app development, we categorized rater comments on the score driving factors for each item and what the app could have done to improve the score for that item. RESULTS We evaluated 17 apps (41% iOS only, 12% Android only, 47% both iOS and Android). We found that on average, the apps are of minimally acceptable quality. Although we identified apps above and below minimally acceptable quality, many apps had broken features and were rated as below acceptable for engagement and information. CONCLUSIONS Minimally acceptable quality is likely insufficient to meet care partner needs. Future research should establish minimum quality standards across dimensions for mobile apps for care partners. The design features of high-quality apps we identified in this research can provide the foundation for benchmarking those standards.


2020 ◽  
Vol 130 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-91
Author(s):  
Eleonora M. C. Trecca ◽  
Antonio Lonigro ◽  
Matteo Gelardi ◽  
Brandon Kim ◽  
Michele Cassano

Objectives: Although the last few years have seen an increased number of smartphone applications (apps) disseminated in the field of Otolaryngology (ORL), these apps vary widely in quality. The aim of this paper, therefore, is to systematically review ORL apps directed towards patients in mobile app stores and the current literature. Methods: The Google Play Store, Apple App Store and PubMed were searched for ORL apps for patients using various keywords pertaining to different ORL subspecialties. Apps not relevant to the scope of this research and/or duplicates, educational apps, apps promoting a business, apps requiring specific separate hardware, and apps in non-English were excluded. In PubMed, keywords pertaining to the subspecialties were combined with “mobile app” in a search query; literature reviews, editorials, case reports, conference papers, duplicate articles, and articles irrelevant to ORL apps were excluded. The quality of apps with the highest number of reviews was assessed using the “Mobile App Rating Scale” (MARS), while the quality of the articles was rated using “The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology” (STROBE) Statement. Results: After searching the app stores, 1074 apps were included and grouped according to their ORL subspecialties. The overall MARS score of the ten most popular apps in each category was 3.65 out of 5. A total of 636 articles were identified in the literature, and 193 were included. The mean adherence percentage of the articles to the STROBE checklist was of 84.37%. Conclusions: Although the apps currently available need further development, their application in ORL appears promising. Further dialogue between physicians and patients, as well as formal support from professional and scientific associations, should be encouraged.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florence Carrouel ◽  
Prescilla Martinon ◽  
Ina Saliasi ◽  
Denis Bourgeois ◽  
Colette Smenteck ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND The global burden of disease attributes 20% of deaths to poor nutrition. Although hundreds of nutrition-related mobile applications have been created to help improve this situation and these have been downloaded by millions of users, the effectiveness of integrating these technologies on the adoption of healthy eating remains mixed. Similarly, no significant evaluation of nutrition applications in French, spoken by approximately 300 million people, has yet been identified in the literature. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study is to review which nutrition mobile apps are currently available on the French market, and to carry out an exhaustive assessment of their quality using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) tool. METHODS A screening of apps related to nutritional health was conducted from March 10 to 17, 2021, on the Google Play Store and the French App Store. A shortlist of 15 apps was identified and assessed using the French version of MARS. Eight dietitian nutritionists assigned to assess seven apps. Remaining apps were randomly allocated to ensure four ratings per app. Intraclass correlation was used to evaluate inter-rater agreement. Mean ± SD scores and their distributions for each section and item were calculated. RESULTS The top scores for quality were obtained by Yazio (mean 3.84 ± standard deviation 0.32), FeelEat (3.71 ± 0.47) and BonneApp (3.65 ± 0.09). The engagement scores (Section A) ranged from 1.95 ± 0.5 for iEatBetter to 3.85 ± 0.44 for Feeleat. The functionality scores (Section B) ranged from 2.25 ± 0.54 for Naor to 4.25 ± 0.46 for Yazio. The Aesthetics scores (Section C) ranged from 2.17 ± 0.34 for Naor to 3.88 ± 0.47 for Yazio. The information scores (Section D) ranged from 2.38 ± 0.60 for iEatBetter:Journal alimentaire to 3.73 ± 0.29 for Yazio. The MARS subjective quality (Section E) varied from 1.13 ± 0.26 for Naor and 1.13 ± 0.25 iEatBetter:Journal alimentaire to 2.28 ± 0.88 for Compteur de calories Fatsecret. The specificity of apps varied from 1.38 ± 0.64 for iEatBetter:Journal alimentaire to 3.50 ± 0.91 for Feeleat. The app-specific score was always lower than the subjective quality score that was always lower than the quality score and that was lower than the rating score from the iOS or Android app stores. CONCLUSIONS Although the prevention and information messages regarding nutritional habits are not scientifically verified before marketing, dieteticians-nutritionists evaluated that the apps quality was quite relevant. The subjective quality and mobile app specificities were associated with lower ratings. Further investigations are needed to assess their alignment with recommendations and their long-term impact on users.


2018 ◽  
Vol 127 (11) ◽  
pp. 836-840 ◽  
Author(s):  
Albert H. Zhou ◽  
Varesh R. Patel ◽  
Soly Baredes ◽  
Jean Anderson Eloy ◽  
Wayne D. Hsueh

Objective: To study and review the currently available mobile applications relating to allergic rhinitis. Methods: The Apple and Google mobile app stores were queried with search terms relating to allergic rhinitis. Apps were assigned to categories and analyzed based on description and characteristics such as popularity, reviews, cost, platform, and physician involvement in development. Results: A total of 72 apps related to allergic rhinitis were identified. Fifty-four apps were unique, with 18 apps found on both operating systems. Forty (55.5%) apps were available in the Apple App store, and 32 (44.4%) apps were available in the Google Play app store. They were grouped into the following categories: patient education (18; 25%), journals (15; 20.8%), symptom tracking (14; 19.4%), clinical/private practice (13; 18.1%), pollen forecast (7; 9.7%), medical education (4; 5.6%), and other (1; 1.4%). The majority of apps were free of charge (67; 93.1%), with paid apps ranging from $1.47 to $4.99. Apps that were reviewed had an average rating of 3.9 out of 5. Physicians were involved in the development of 37 (51.4%) apps. Conclusions: The collection of mobile apps developed for allergic rhinitis includes those for both educational and clinical use. Mobile apps may have an increasing role in otolaryngic allergy and rhinology practices in the future. Thus, continued research is warranted to determine the best way to ensure the accuracy and quality of app content as well as the extent mobile apps can benefit allergic rhinitis patients.


10.2196/14991 ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (8) ◽  
pp. e14991 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Knitza ◽  
Koray Tascilar ◽  
Eva-Maria Messner ◽  
Marco Meyer ◽  
Diana Vossen ◽  
...  

Background Chronic rheumatic diseases need long-term treatment and professional supervision. Mobile apps promise to improve the lives of patients and physicians. In routine practice, however, rheumatology apps are largely unknown and little is known about their quality and safety. Objective The aim of this study was to provide an overview of mobile rheumatology apps currently available in German app stores, evaluate app quality using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS), and compile brief, ready-to-use descriptions for patients and rheumatologists. Methods The German App Store and Google Play store were systematically searched to identify German rheumatology mobile apps for patient and physician use. MARS was used to independently assess app quality by 8 physicians, 4 using Android and 4 using iOS smartphones. Apps were randomly assigned so that 4 apps were rated by all raters and the remaining apps were rated by two Android and two iOS users. Furthermore, brief app descriptions including app developers, app categories, and features were compiled to inform potential users and developers. Results In total, 128 and 63 apps were identified in the German Google Play and App Store, respectively. After removing duplicates and only including apps that were available in both stores, 28 apps remained. Sixteen apps met the inclusion criteria, which were (1) German language, (2) availability in both app stores, (3) targeting patients or physicians as users, and (4) clearly including rheumatology or rheumatic diseases as subject matter. Exclusion criteria were (1) congress apps and (2) company apps with advertisements. Nine apps addressed patients and 7 apps addressed physicians. No clinical studies to support the effectiveness and safety of apps could be found. Pharmaceutical companies were the main developers of two apps. Rheuma Auszeit was the only app mainly developed by a patient organization. This app had the highest overall MARS score (4.19/5). Three out of 9 patient apps featured validated questionnaires. The median overall MARS score was 3.85/5, ranging from 2.81/5 to 4.19/5. One patient-targeted and one physician-targeted app had MARS scores >4/5. No significant rater gender or platform (iOS/Android) differences could be observed. The overall correlation between app store ratings and MARS scores was low and inconsistent between platforms. Conclusions To our knowledge, this is the first study that systematically identified and evaluated mobile apps in rheumatology for patients and physicians available in German app stores. We found a lack of supporting clinical studies, use of validated questionnaires, and involvement of academic developers. Overall app quality was heterogeneous. To create high-quality apps, closer cooperation led by patients and physicians is vital.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document