School of Medicine, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2021 Oct 12;9(10):e28384. doi: 10.2196/28384.
In recent years, there has been rapid growth in the availability and use of mobile health (mHealth) apps around the world. A consensus regarding an accepted standard to assess the quality of such apps has yet to be reached. A factor that exacerbates the challenge of mHealth app quality assessment is variations in the interpretation of quality and its subdimensions. Consequently, it has become increasingly difficult for health care professionals worldwide to distinguish apps of high quality from those of lower quality. This exposes both patients and health care professionals to unnecessary risks. Despite progress, limited understanding of the contributions of researchers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) exists on this topic. Furthermore, the applicability of quality assessment methodologies in LMIC settings remains relatively unexplored.
This rapid review aims to identify current methodologies in the literature to assess the quality of mHealth apps, understand what aspects of quality these methodologies address, determine what input has been made by authors from LMICs, and examine the applicability of such methodologies in LMICs.
This review was registered with PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews). A search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus was performed for papers related to mHealth app quality assessment methodologies, which were published in English between 2005 and 2020. By taking a rapid review approach, a thematic and descriptive analysis of the papers was performed.
Electronic database searches identified 841 papers. After the screening process, 52 papers remained for inclusion. Of the 52 papers, 5 (10%) proposed novel methodologies that could be used to evaluate mHealth apps of diverse medical areas of interest, 8 (15%) proposed methodologies that could be used to assess apps concerned with a specific medical focus, and 39 (75%) used methodologies developed by other published authors to evaluate the quality of various groups of mHealth apps. The authors in 6% (3/52) of papers were solely affiliated to institutes in LMICs. A further 15% (8/52) of papers had at least one coauthor affiliated to an institute in an LMIC.
Quality assessment of mHealth apps is complex in nature and at times subjective. Despite growing research on this topic, to date, an all-encompassing appropriate means for evaluating the quality of mHealth apps does not exist. There has been engagement with authors affiliated to institutes across LMICs; however, limited consideration of current generic methodologies for application in LMIC settings has been identified.
PROSPERO CRD42020205149; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=205149.
近年来,全球移动医疗 (mHealth) 应用的可及性和使用量迅速增长。然而,对于如何评估这些应用的质量,尚未达成共识。一个加剧 mHealth 应用质量评估挑战的因素是对质量及其子维度的解释存在差异。因此,全球医疗保健专业人员越来越难以区分高质量和低质量的应用。这使患者和医疗保健专业人员都面临不必要的风险。尽管取得了进展,但在这个主题上,对于来自低收入和中等收入国家 (LMICs) 的研究人员的贡献的理解仍然有限。此外,质量评估方法在 LMIC 环境中的适用性仍然相对未知。
本快速综述旨在确定文献中评估 mHealth 应用质量的当前方法,了解这些方法解决了哪些质量方面,确定来自 LMICs 的作者的贡献,并研究这些方法在 LMICs 的适用性。
本综述已在 PROSPERO(国际前瞻性系统评价注册库)注册。对 2005 年至 2020 年间发表的有关 mHealth 应用质量评估方法的英文文献进行了 PubMed、EMBASE、Web of Science 和 Scopus 的检索。通过采用快速综述方法,对论文进行了主题和描述性分析。
电子数据库检索共确定了 841 篇论文。经过筛选过程,有 52 篇论文被纳入。在这 52 篇论文中,有 5 篇(10%)提出了新颖的方法,可以用于评估不同医学领域的 mHealth 应用,8 篇(15%)提出了可以用于评估特定医学重点的应用的方法,39 篇(75%)使用了其他已发表作者开发的方法来评估各种 mHealth 应用的质量。在 6%(3/52)的论文中,作者仅隶属于 LMICs 的机构。另有 15%(8/52)的论文至少有一位合著者隶属于 LMICs 的机构。
mHealth 应用质量评估具有复杂性和主观性。尽管对此主题的研究不断增加,但迄今为止,尚无一种全面适用的方法来评估 mHealth 应用的质量。已经与隶属于 LMICs 机构的作者进行了接触;然而,已经确定很少考虑将当前通用方法应用于 LMIC 环境。
PROSPERO CRD42020205149;https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=205149。