scholarly journals Measuring the Quality of Mobile Apps for the Management of Pain: Systematic Search and Evaluation Using the Mobile App Rating Scale (Preprint)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alejandro Salazar ◽  
Helena de Sola ◽  
Inmaculada Failde ◽  
Jose Antonio Moral-Munoz

BACKGROUND Chronic pain is a major health issue requiring an approach that not only considers medication, but also many other factors included in the biopsychosocial model of pain. New technologies, such as mobile apps, are tools to address these factors, although in many cases they lack proven quality or are not based on scientific evidence, so it is necessary to review and measure their quality. OBJECTIVE The aim is to evaluate and measure the quality of mobile apps for the management of pain using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS). METHODS This study included 18 pain-related mobile apps from the App Store and Play Store. The MARS was administered to measure their quality. We list the scores (of each section and the final score) of every app and we report the mean score (and standard deviation) for an overall vision of the quality of the pain-related apps. We compare the section scores between the groups defined according to the tertiles via analysis of variance (ANOVA) or Kruskal-Wallis test, depending on the normality of the distribution (Shapiro-Wilk test). RESULTS The global quality ranged from 1.74 (worst app) to 4.35 (best app). Overall, the 18 apps obtained a mean score of 3.17 (SD 0.75). The best-rated sections were functionality (mean 3.92, SD 0.72), esthetics (mean 3.29, SD 1.05), and engagement (mean 2.87, SD 1.14), whereas the worst rated were app specific (mean 2.48, SD 1.00), information (mean 2.52, SD 0.82), and app subjective quality (mean 2.68, SD 1.22). The main differences between tertiles were found on app subjective quality, engagement, esthetics, and app specific. CONCLUSIONS Current pain-related apps are of a certain quality mainly regarding their technical aspects, although they fail to offer information and have an impact on the user. Most apps are not based on scientific evidence, have not been rigorously tested, and the confidentiality of the information collected is not guaranteed. Future apps would need to improve these aspects and exploit the capabilities of current devices.

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.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonia Lambrecht ◽  
Nicolas Vuillerme ◽  
Christina Raab ◽  
David Simon ◽  
Eva-Maria Messner ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND Mobile applications promise to improve current health care. A growing number app quality studies exist to help patients and physicians choose appropriate, helpful and useful applications. However, current mobile app quality ratings are mostly physician-based. They exclude patients although as end-users, patients are able to provide the most relevant feedback. In a recent physician-based review of rheumatic apps, Rheuma Auszeit received the best overall rating (4.2/5), however this app has never been systematically evaluated by the intended end-users, rheumatic patients. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was (1) to assess the quality of Rheuma Auszeit by rheumatic patients and (2) to evaluate the association between uMARS (User Version of the Mobile App Rating Scale) scores and patients’ characteristics. METHODS Consecutive patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and spondyloarthritis were seen at the rheumatology clinic at university hospital Erlangen, Germany. They were asked to evaluate the app Rheuma Auszeit using the uMARS and to complete a paper-based survey evaluating the individual preferences, attitudes and ehealth literacy. uMARS assesses the dimensions of engagement, functionality, aesthetics, information, and subjective quality on 5-point scales. The association between uMARS scores and patients’ characteristics was further explored. RESULTS Between December 2018 and January 2019, a total of 126 patients evaluated Rheuma Auszeit using uMARS and filled out the paper-based survey. The median uMARS score was 3.9, IQR 0.7. Functionality was the domain with the highest rating (median 4.8, IQR 0.8), followed by aesthetics (median 4.0, IQR 0.7), information (median 3.5, IQR 0.8), and engagement (median 3.2, IQR 1.0). Subjective quality was average (median 3.0, IQR 1.0). The lowest scoring individual item was customization with a median of 2.5/5. Lower functionality scores were reported among older female rheumatic patients (P<.004). Older male rheumatic patients reported a higher subjective quality score (P<.024). Perceived disease activity and disease duration did not significantly correlate with any uMARS subdomain scores. eHealth literacy significantly correlated with functionality uMARS subdomain ratings (Rho=0.18; P<.042). Preferred time of app usage significantly correlated with engagement (Rho=0.20; P<.024), functionality (Rho=0.19; P<.029), total uMARS score (Rho=0.21; P<.017) and subjective quality score (Rho=0.21; P<.017). The vast majority of rheumatic patients would consider recommending Rheuma Auszeit to other patients (117/126; 92.9%). CONCLUSIONS Rheuma Auszeit was well accepted by patients suffering from rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondyloarthritis. Lacking customization could lead to low app compliance and should be improved. The study highlights the potential and feasibility of therapeutic complementary digital solutions in rheumatology.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tehmina Gladman ◽  
Grace Tylee ◽  
Steve Gallagher ◽  
Jonathan Mair ◽  
Rebecca Grainger

BACKGROUND Mobile apps are widely used in health professions, which increases the need for simple methods to determine the quality of apps. In particular, teachers need the ability to curate high-quality mobile apps for student learning. OBJECTIVE This study aims to systematically search for and evaluate the quality of clinical skills mobile apps as learning tools. The quality of apps meeting the specified criteria was evaluated using two measures—the widely used Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS), which measures general app quality, and the Mobile App Rubric for Learning (MARuL), a recently developed instrument that measures the value of apps for student learning—to assess whether MARuL is more effective than MARS in identifying high-quality apps for learning. METHODS Two mobile app stores were systematically searched using clinical skills terms commonly found in medical education and apps meeting the criteria identified using an approach based on PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. A total of 9 apps were identified during the screening process. The apps were rated independently by 2 reviewers using MARS and MARuL. RESULTS The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for the 2 raters using MARS and MARuL were the same (MARS ICC [two-way]=0.68; <i>P</i>&lt;.001 and MARuL ICC [two-way]=0.68; <i>P</i>&lt;.001). Of the 9 apps, Geeky Medics-OSCE revision (MARS Android=3.74; MARS iOS=3.68; MARuL Android=75; and MARuL iOS=73) and OSCE PASS: Medical Revision (MARS Android=3.79; MARS iOS=3.71; MARuL Android=69; and MARuL iOS=73) scored highly on both measures of app quality and for both Android and iOS. Both measures also showed agreement for the lowest rated app, Patient Education Institute (MARS Android=2.21; MARS iOS=2.11; MARuL Android=18; and MARuL iOS=21.5), which had the lowest scores in all categories except information (MARS) and professional (MARuL) in both operating systems. MARS and MARuL were both able to differentiate between the highest and lowest quality apps; however, MARuL was better able to differentiate apps based on teaching and learning quality. CONCLUSIONS This systematic search and rating of clinical skills apps for learning found that the quality of apps was highly variable. However, 2 apps—Geeky Medics-OSCE revision and OSCE PASS: Medical Revision—rated highly for both versions and with both quality measures. MARS and MARuL showed similar abilities to differentiate the quality of the 9 apps. However, MARuL’s incorporation of teaching and learning elements as part of a multidimensional measure of quality may make it more appropriate for use with apps focused on teaching and learning, whereas MARS’s more general rating of quality may be more appropriate for health apps targeting a general health audience. Ratings of the 9 apps by both measures also highlighted the variable quality of clinical skills mobile apps for learning. CLINICALTRIAL


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. e0246061
Author(s):  
Agustín Ciapponi ◽  
Manuel Donato ◽  
A. Metin Gülmezoglu ◽  
Tomás Alconada ◽  
Ariel Bardach

The use of substandard and counterfeit medicines (SCM) leads to significant health and economic consequences, like treatment failure, rise of antimicrobial resistance, extra expenditures of individuals or households and serious adverse drug reactions including death. Our objective was to systematically search, identify and compare relevant available mobile applications (apps) for smartphones and tablets, which use could potentially affect clinical and public health outcomes. We carried out a systematic review of the literature in January 2020, including major medical databases, and app stores. We used the validated Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) to assess the quality of apps, (1 worst score, 3 acceptable score, and 5 best score). We planned to evaluate the accuracy of the mobile apps to detect SCM. We retrieved 335 references through medical databases and 42 from Apple, Google stores and Google Scholar. We finally included two studies of the medical database, 25 apps (eight from the App Store, eight from Google Play, eight from both stores, and one from Google Scholar), and 16 websites. We only found one report on the accuracy of a mobile apps detecting SCMs. Most apps use the imprint, color or shape for pill identification, and only a few offer pill detection through photographs or bar code. The MARS mean score for the apps was 3.17 (acceptable), with a maximum of 4.9 and a minimum of 1.1. The ‘functionality’ dimension resulted in the highest mean score (3.4), while the ‘engagement’ and ‘information’ dimensions showed the lowest one (3.0). In conclusion, we found a remarkable evidence gap about the accuracy of mobile apps in detecting SCMs. However, mobile apps could potentially be useful to screen for SCM by assessing the physical characteristics of pills, although this should still be assessed in properly designed research studies.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaime Martin-Martin ◽  
Antonio Muro-Culebras ◽  
Adrian Escriche-Escuder ◽  
Manuel González-Sánchez ◽  
María Ruíz-Muñoz ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND There are a large number of mobile applications that allow monitoring of health status. The quality of the applications is only evaluated by users and not by standard criteria. OBJECTIVE To examine depression-related applications in major mobile application stores and analyse them using the rating scale tool MARS. METHODS A search of digital applications for the control of symptoms and behavioral changes in depression was carried out in the two reference mobile operating systems Apple (App Store) and Android (Play Store) by means of two independent reviewers between September and October 2019. The search was performed on the two operating systems in the regions of Spain and the United Kingdom. Eighteen applications from the Android Play Store and twelve from the App Store were included in this study. The quality of the applications was evaluated using the MARS scale. Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) were applied for the values of each section and the final score of the applications. RESULTS The average score of the applications ranged from 2.38 to 4.6 (3.67 ± 0.53) applying the MARS scale, ranging from 1 (inadequate) to 5 (excellent). The sections with the highest scores were Functionality (4.51) and Esthetics (3.98) and those with the lowest App Subjective quality (2.86) and Information (3.08). CONCLUSIONS MHealth apps (such as apps for the treatment of depression) have great potential to influence in the health status of users. Apps come to the digital market from mobile app stores without any kind of health control.


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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (OCE2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel McAleese ◽  
Angeliki Papadaki

AbstractThe popularity of smartphone apps is rising globally. However, the quality of widely available health apps and their effectiveness to promote behaviour change, by incorporating behavioural change techniques (BCTs) that have been suggested to result in behaviour change, is questionable. The aim of this study was to conduct a content analysis of smartphone apps that utilise the Mediterranean diet (MD), a dietary pattern linked to numerous health benefits, to promote healthy dietary behaviours. The specific objectives were to evaluate the quality of these apps and their use of BCTs. The iTunes Store and Google Play were searched for all available apps (free and requiring payment to download) promoting the MD. Apps were excluded if they were not available in English, did not focus only on the MD or the download process was corrupt. The Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) was used to assess app engagement, functionality, aesthetics and information quality (the average of which represents a quality mean score (QMS)) and subjective quality. The Abraham & Michie behaviour change taxonomy was adapted to create a 20-item checklist to assess the presence of BCTs in the eligible apps. Thirty nine apps (64.1% of which were free to download) were analysed. The overall QMS was 2.96 ± 0.46. The lowest and highest scored QMS constructs were engagement (2.42 ± 0.62) and functionality (3.95 ± 0.45), respectively, whilst the overall mean subjective quality score was 1.71 ± 0.51 (scores’ range 1–5). Apps were scored higher for aesthetics if they required payment (3.14 vs. 2.78, p = 0.047). Apps incorporated an average of 3.10 ± 1.87 BCTs, with no difference in the number of BCTs present according to platform or cost. From the five BCTs that have been suggested to promote behaviour change, ‘self-monitoring’ was present in six apps, ‘intention formation’ in 15 and ‘goal setting’ in one. None of the apps incorporated the ‘review of behavioural goals’ and ‘feedback on performance’ BCTs. The total QMS score was positively associated with the presence of BCTs (r = 0.409, p = 0.008). Based on the MARS assessment, apps promoting the MD that are available in the public domain were of moderate quality. In contrast, the low presence, particularly of efficacious, BCTs and low subjective quality scores suggest that apps are actually of poor quality and potentially not effective in promoting behaviour change towards an MD diet. These findings provide important insights for the future development of high-quality apps to promote the MD at population level.


Author(s):  
Jihye Choi ◽  
Chongwook Chung ◽  
Hyekyung Woo

Dietary mobile applications (apps) continue to hold promise for facilitating a healthy diet and managing nutrition. However, few studies have objectively evaluated the content and quality of such apps in Korea. The present study assessed the content and quality of dietary mobile apps using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS). We selected 29 dietary apps based on keywords and eligibility criteria for inclusion in the analyses. We conducted regression analyses to examine the association between app content and MARS scores. Most of the apps featured a tracking tool, while few featured rewards or follow-up management. Our quality assessment revealed that the top-rated apps have distinct levels of quality in terms of MARS scores. The regression analyses showed that the ways in which the apps provide information and motivate the users are statistically significant predictors of app quality. Our findings may facilitate the selection of dietary apps in Korea and provide guidelines for app developers regarding potential improvements in terms of content and quality.


2018 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 388-397 ◽  
Author(s):  
Snežana Jovičić ◽  
Joanna Siodmiak ◽  
Ian D. Watson

Abstract Background Many of the mobile applications (apps) used for delivering health interventions involve laboratory medicine data. This survey was conducted to search the online market for health apps that manage laboratory medicine data. The aim was to review them and perform a quality evaluation. Methods Apps search criteria were “Lab results blood work”, “Lab results”, and “Health apps”. After the stepwise exclusion process, 52 selected apps were downloaded and analyzed. For review and content analysis of the apps, a multidimensional tool for classifying and rating the quality of mobile health apps – Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS), was used. Results Selected apps were classified into five categories according to their intended use by patients or physicians, and the type of data engaged. Spearman’s correlation analysis found significant correlations between MARS individual scoring items, as with the subjective quality and number of technical aspects. Kruskal-Wallis analysis showed a significant difference in the number of technical aspects employed, MARS engagement and informational quality score items, total score, and subjective quality. The lowest values for all of these items were in the category of apps designed for patients, and the post hoc test showed that the difference was statistically significant between this and the values in all other categories. Conclusions Apps designed for patients, are of the poorest quality, considering the total quality of the content and information they provide, estimated using the MARS tool. This estimation needs to be validated for laboratory medicine apps, and eventually modified after consideration of specific quality benchmarks.


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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document