Education Unit, University of Otago Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand.
Hutt Valley District Health Board, Lower Hutt, New Zealand.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2021 Apr 23;9(4):e25377. doi: 10.2196/25377.
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.
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.
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.
The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for the 2 raters using MARS and MARuL were the same (MARS ICC [two-way]=0.68; P<.001 and MARuL ICC [two-way]=0.68; P<.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.
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.
移动应用在医疗专业中被广泛应用，这就需要有一种简单的方法来确定应用程序的质量。特别是，教师需要为学生学习选择高质量的移动应用程序的能力。
本研究旨在系统地搜索和评估临床技能移动应用程序作为学习工具的质量。使用两种方法来评估符合指定标准的应用程序的质量：广泛使用的移动应用程序评级量表（MARS），用于衡量一般应用程序质量；以及最近开发的用于衡量学生学习价值的移动应用程序评分表（MARuL），以评估 MARuL 是否比 MARS 更能识别出适合学习的高质量应用程序。
使用医学教育中常见的临床技能术语，在两个移动应用程序商店中进行系统搜索，并根据基于 PRISMA（系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目）指南的方法确定符合标准的应用程序。在筛选过程中确定了 9 个应用程序。这两个应用程序由两名独立的评审员使用 MARS 和 MARuL 进行评分。
两名评审员使用 MARS 和 MARuL 的组内相关系数（ICC）相同（MARS 双向 ICC [2 路]=0.68；P<.001 和 MARuL 双向 ICC [2 路]=0.68；P<.001）。在这 9 个应用程序中，Geeky Medics-OSCE 复习（MARS Android=3.74；MARS iOS=3.68；MARuL Android=75；MARuL iOS=73）和 OSCE PASS：Medical Revision（MARS Android=3.79；MARS iOS=3.71；MARuL Android=69；MARuL iOS=73）在两个应用程序质量指标上都得分很高，并且在 Android 和 iOS 上都有高分。这两种方法都对得分最低的应用程序（Patient Education Institute，MARS Android=2.21；MARS iOS=2.11；MARuL Android=18；MARuL iOS=21.5）显示了一致性，该应用程序在所有类别中的得分都较低，除了信息（MARS）和专业（MARuL）在两个操作系统中。MARS 和 MARuL 都能够区分最高质量和最低质量的应用程序；然而，MARuL 能够更好地根据教学和学习质量来区分应用程序。
本研究对学习用临床技能应用程序进行了系统搜索和评分，发现应用程序的质量高度可变。然而，有 2 个应用程序-Geeky Medics-OSCE 复习和 OSCE PASS：Medical Revision-在两个版本和两个质量指标上都获得了高分。MARS 和 MARuL 都显示出了区分 9 个应用程序质量的相似能力。然而，MARuL 将教学和学习元素纳入多维质量衡量标准的做法，使其更适合用于专注于教学和学习的应用程序，而 MARS 对质量的更一般评价可能更适合针对一般健康受众的健康应用程序。这两种方法对这 9 个应用程序的评价也突出了临床技能移动应用程序在学习方面的质量参差不齐。
