Bucher Emma, Sharkey Callie, Henderson Abby, Basaran Briette, Meyer Sarah, Chen Chen X
Indiana University School of Nursing, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
University of Arizona College of Nursing, Office 439, 1305 N Martin Ave, Tucson, AZ, 85721, USA.
BMC Womens Health. 2025 May 28;25(1):261. doi: 10.1186/s12905-025-03812-1.
Menstrual health apps have become increasingly popular, providing users with a tool to monitor and learn about menstrual cycles, symptoms, and management. While previous research examined different aspects of menstrual health apps (e.g., fertility tracking), few examined menstrual health apps comprehensively to examine the menstrual health apps' functionality, inclusiveness, and health education information. The purpose of this study was to evaluate menstrual health apps' functionality, inclusiveness, and health education information.
In this descriptive study, two reviewers independently searched, screened, and evaluated each app using a standardized tool. Three terms (i.e., "period pain," "period app," and "menstrual cramp") were used to search the Apple App Store. Apps were also cross-searched on the Google Play Store. We screened 60 apps. After excluding duplicates and apps that did not meet the inclusion criteria, 14 apps were evaluated on their functionality (user experience, internet and language accessibility, privacy, cycle-prediction, and symptom-tracking ability), inclusiveness (cycle lengths and regularities, fertility goals, and gender expressions and sexualities), and menstrual health education information (credibility and comprehensiveness, presence of additional health information, and information on when to seek care). We used a modified version of the Mobile App Rating Scale to score each app.
For functionality, half of the apps had third-party advertisements. Most (71.4%) did not require cellular connection to utilize menstrual symptom-tracking, and 71.4% shared user data with third parties. All had cycle-prediction and symptom-tracking functions. The mean number of relevant symptoms tracked was 17.5 (SD = 5.44). None of the apps used or cited validated symptom measurement tools. For inclusiveness, all apps could be tailored to cycle lengths other than 28 days, 85.7% had ovulation prediction functions, 50% had neutral or no pronouns, and 92.9% allowed users to input at least one contraceptive type. For health education information, 42.9% cited medical literature.
This study suggests a lack of professional involvement and gender inclusivity in menstrual health app development. Healthcare professionals should educate themselves on apps' functionality, inclusiveness, and health education information before recommending apps. Additional research is needed to understand diverse users' perspectives on menstrual health apps.
月经健康应用程序越来越受欢迎，为用户提供了一种监测和了解月经周期、症状及管理方法的工具。虽然此前的研究探讨了月经健康应用程序的不同方面（如生育追踪），但很少有研究对月经健康应用程序进行全面考察，以审视其功能、包容性和健康教育信息。本研究的目的是评估月经健康应用程序的功能、包容性和健康教育信息。
在这项描述性研究中，两名评审员使用标准化工具独立搜索、筛选和评估每个应用程序。使用三个术语（即“经期疼痛”“经期应用程序”和“痛经”）在苹果应用商店进行搜索。应用程序也在谷歌应用商店进行交叉搜索。我们筛选了60个应用程序。在排除重复项和不符合纳入标准的应用程序后，对14个应用程序的功能（用户体验、网络和语言可及性、隐私、周期预测和症状追踪能力）、包容性（周期长度和规律性、生育目标以及性别表达和性取向）和月经健康教育信息（可信度和全面性、是否存在其他健康信息以及何时寻求医疗护理的信息）进行了评估。我们使用移动应用程序评分量表的修改版对每个应用程序进行评分。
在功能方面，一半的应用程序有第三方广告。大多数（71.4%）应用程序在使用月经症状追踪功能时不需要蜂窝网络连接，71.4%的应用程序会与第三方共享用户数据。所有应用程序都有周期预测和症状追踪功能。追踪的相关症状平均数量为17.5个（标准差=5.44）。没有一个应用程序使用或引用经过验证的症状测量工具。在包容性方面，所有应用程序都可以针对28天以外的周期长度进行调整，85.7%的应用程序有排卵预测功能，50%的应用程序使用中性或无代词，92.9%的应用程序允许用户输入至少一种避孕方式。在月经健康教育信息方面，42.9%的应用程序引用了医学文献。
本研究表明，月经健康应用程序的开发缺乏专业参与和性别包容性。医疗保健专业人员在推荐应用程序之前，应了解应用程序的功能、包容性和健康教育信息。需要进一步研究以了解不同用户对月经健康应用程序的看法。
