比较中国传统医学和现代医学的智能手机应用程序:系统搜索和内容分析。
Comparing Smartphone Apps for Traditional Chinese Medicine and Modern Medicine in China: Systematic Search and Content Analysis.
机构信息
Department of Cardiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Department of Infectious Diseases, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
出版信息
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2021 Mar 24;9(3):e27406. doi: 10.2196/27406.
BACKGROUND
Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is an integral part of mainstream medicine in China, with theories and practices that are completely different from modern medicine. TCM should not be ignored or confused with modern medicine in the analysis of the Chinese health care system, including the analysis of mobile health (mHealth) apps. To date, differences between TCM apps and modern medicine apps have not be systematically investigated.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to systematically compare the quality of apps for TCM and modern medicine in China.
METHODS
In December 2020, we searched iOS (iTunes) and Android (Tencent, Oppo, and Huawei app stores) platforms for all mHealth apps and then categorized them as TCM or modern medicine apps if they were included in the final analysis. The included apps were downloaded on smartphones and assessed by 2 reviewers on the following 4 aspects: (1) data in the app stores, including user ratings, download counts, cost, target users, and year of last update; (2) functionality; (3) quality of the app content as determined by the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS); and (4) analysis of the app privacy and security.
RESULTS
In total, 658 apps were analyzed, including 261 TCM medicine apps and 397 modern medicine apps. The average download count of modern medicine apps (approximately 5 million) was more than 10 times that of TCM apps (approximately 400,000). Regarding functionalities, 64.7% (257/397) of modern medicine apps provided telemedicine (74/261, 28.4% in TCM apps), 62.7% (249/397) provided registration (70/261, 26.8% in TCM apps), and 45.6% (181/397) provided communication (38/261, 14.6% in TCM apps). A larger proportion of TCM apps provided prescription and medication management (144/261, 55.2% in TCM apps versus 168/397, 42.3% in modern medicine apps). The majority of modern medicine apps (329/397, 82.9%) combined ≥3 functionalities compared with one-third of TCM apps (93/261, 34.6%). We then selected 81 top apps for quality and safety assessment (41 TCM apps and 40 modern medicine apps). Of these, the mean overall MARS score of TCM apps (2.7, SD 0.5) was significantly lower than modern medicine apps (3.6, SD 0.4). Almost all modern medicine apps (38/40, 95%) addressed privacy and security by providing a privacy policy and describing how to protect personal data, but less than half of the TCM apps (18/41, 44%) described this information (P<.001).
CONCLUSIONS
The different functionalities reflect the distinct innate characteristics of these two medical systems. Although great progress has been made and the Chinese mHealth market size is large, there still exist many opportunities for future development, especially for TCM.
背景
中医药是中国主流医学的一个组成部分,其理论和实践与现代医学完全不同。在分析中国的医疗保健系统时,包括移动医疗(mHealth)应用程序,不能忽视或混淆中医药,应将其与现代医学区分开来。迄今为止,中医药应用程序与现代医学应用程序之间的差异尚未得到系统研究。
目的
本研究旨在系统比较中国的中医药和现代医学应用程序的质量。
方法
2020 年 12 月,我们在 iOS(iTunes)和 Android(腾讯、OPPO 和华为应用商店)平台上搜索了所有 mHealth 应用程序,如果它们包含在最终分析中,则将其归类为中医药或现代医学应用程序。下载包含的应用程序到智能手机上,并由 2 位审阅者对以下 4 个方面进行评估:(1)应用商店中的数据,包括用户评分、下载量、成本、目标用户和最后更新时间;(2)功能;(3)应用内容质量,由移动应用评级量表(MARS)确定;(4)应用隐私和安全分析。
结果
共分析了 658 个应用程序,包括 261 个中医药应用程序和 397 个现代医学应用程序。现代医学应用程序的平均下载量(约 500 万)是中医药应用程序(约 40 万)的 10 倍以上。在功能方面,64.7%(257/397)的现代医学应用程序提供远程医疗(中医药应用程序中为 74/261,占 28.4%),62.7%(249/397)提供注册(中医药应用程序中为 70/261,占 26.8%),45.6%(181/397)提供通信(中医药应用程序中为 38/261,占 14.6%)。更大比例的中医药应用程序提供处方和用药管理(中医药应用程序中为 144/261,占 55.2%,而现代医学应用程序中为 168/397,占 42.3%)。与中医药应用程序三分之一(93/261,34.6%)相比,大多数现代医学应用程序(329/397,82.9%)结合了≥3 种功能。然后我们选择了 81 个质量和安全评估的顶级应用程序(41 个中医药应用程序和 40 个现代医学应用程序)。其中,中医药应用程序的总体 MARS 得分均值(2.7,SD 0.5)明显低于现代医学应用程序(3.6,SD 0.4)。几乎所有的现代医学应用程序(38/40,95%)都通过提供隐私政策和描述如何保护个人数据来解决隐私和安全问题,但只有不到一半的中医药应用程序(18/41,44%)描述了这些信息(P<.001)。
结论
不同的功能反映了这两种医学系统的不同固有特征。尽管已经取得了很大的进展,中国的移动医疗市场规模很大,但仍有许多未来发展的机会,特别是中医药。