Stifani Bianca M, Peters Melanie, French Katherine, Gill Roopan K
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, New York Medical College, Valhalla, New York, United States of America.
Vitala Global Foundation, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
PLOS Digit Health. 2023 Jul 17;2(7):e0000277. doi: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000277. eCollection 2023 Jul.
Mobile applications (apps) are increasingly being used to access health-related information, but it may be challenging for consumers to identify accurate and reliable platforms. We conducted a systematic review of applications that provide information about abortion. We searched the iTunes and Google Play stores and queried professional networks to identify relevant apps. To evaluate the apps, we used the validated Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) and added relevant abortion-specific elements. Two reviewers independently rated each app, and we report mean scores on a 5-point scale across the domains of engagement, functionality, esthetics, and information. We also rated app characteristics (including target population and reach), and number of desirable abortion-specific features. We defined recommended apps as those that achieved a score of 4.0 or above for the question: "would you recommend this app to people who may benefit from it?" Our search initially yielded 282 apps and we identified two additional apps through professional mailing lists. Most were irrelevant or not abortion-specific. We excluded 37 apps that sought to discourage users from seeking abortion. Only 10 apps met inclusion criteria for this review. The Euki app had the highest overall score (4.0). Half of the apps achieved a score of 3.0 or greater. Most of the apps had few desirable design features. Some apps provided significant information but had poor functionality. Only four apps met criteria for being recommended: Euki, Safe Abortion by Hesperian, Ipas Mexico, and Marie Stopes Mexico. In conclusion, we found few apps that provide unbiased information about abortion, and their quality varied greatly. App developers and abortion experts should consider designing additional apps that are clinically accurate, unbiased and well-functioning. We registered this review in the PROSPERO database (Registration # CRD42020195802).
移动应用程序（应用）越来越多地被用于获取与健康相关的信息，但消费者要识别准确可靠的平台可能具有挑战性。我们对提供堕胎相关信息的应用程序进行了系统评价。我们搜索了iTunes和谷歌应用商店，并查询了专业网络以识别相关应用。为了评估这些应用，我们使用了经过验证的移动应用评分量表（MARS）并添加了相关的堕胎特定元素。两名评审员独立对每个应用进行评分，我们报告在参与度、功能、美学和信息等领域的5分制平均得分。我们还对应用特征（包括目标人群和覆盖范围）以及理想的堕胎特定功能数量进行了评分。我们将推荐应用定义为在“你会向可能从中受益的人推荐这个应用吗？”这个问题上得分达到4.0或更高的应用。我们的搜索最初产生了282个应用，我们通过专业邮件列表又识别出另外两个应用。大多数应用不相关或不是特定于堕胎的。我们排除了37个试图劝阻用户寻求堕胎的应用。只有10个应用符合本评价的纳入标准。Euki应用的总体得分最高（4.0）。一半的应用得分达到3.0或更高。大多数应用几乎没有理想的设计特征。一些应用提供了大量信息但功能较差。只有四个应用符合推荐标准：Euki、Hesperian的安全堕胎、墨西哥伊帕斯和墨西哥玛丽斯特普斯。总之，我们发现很少有应用提供关于堕胎的无偏见信息，而且它们的质量差异很大。应用开发者和堕胎专家应考虑设计更多临床准确、无偏见且功能良好的应用。我们在PROSPERO数据库中注册了本评价（注册号CRD42020195802）。
