Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29986846›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2018

An Assessment Framework for e-Mental Health Apps in Canada: Results of a Modified Delphi Process.

Jennifer Zelmer, Krystle van Hoof, MaryAnn Notarianni, Trevor van Mierlo, Megan Schellenberg, Cara Tannenbaum

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07686848 (Evaluating the Impact of a Smartphone App on Health Outcomes and Treatment Adherence in Adolescents With Idiopathic Scoliosis), which is not on this map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT07686848 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2028, after this paper: background citation

Evaluating the Impact of a Smartphone App on Health Outcomes and Treatment Adherence in Adolescents With Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Mixed Method Quasi-Experimental Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorOslo Metropolitan UniversityRan2028 to 2031Enrolled30ConditionsAdolescence Idiopathic Scoliosis, AISArmsDinSkoliose smartphone application
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 76 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Help Is Just a Message Away: Online Counselling Chat Services Bridging Gaps in Youth Mental Health?European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Understanding and Defining Young People's Involvement and Under-Representation in Mental Health Research: A Delphi Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Alberta Rating Index for Apps: Study of Reliability and Validity.Canadian journal of occupational therapy. Revue canadienne d'ergotherapie · 2022
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jennifer Zelmer *Azimuth Health Group & University of Victoria, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1556-6686
Krystle van Hoof *Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Institute of Gender and Health, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4382-3918
MaryAnn Notarianni *Mental Health Commission of Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3407-0264
Trevor van Mierlo *Evolution Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5675-0084
Megan Schellenberg *Mental Health Commission of Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4917-5488
Cara Tannenbaum *Faculties of Medicine and Pharmacy, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7102-2333
Mental Health Commission of Canada · CACanadian Institutes of Health Research · CAInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal · CAUniversity of Victoria · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe number of e-mental health apps is increasing rapidly. Studies have shown that the use of some apps is beneficial, whereas others are ineffective or do not meet users' privacy expectations. Individuals and organizations that curate, recommend, host, use, or pay for apps have an interest in categorizing apps according to the consensus criteria of usability and effectiveness. Others have previously published recommendations for assessing health-related apps; however, the extent to which these recommendations can be generalized across different population groups (eg, culture, gender, and language) remains unclear. This study describes an attempt by Canadian stakeholders to develop an e-mental health assessment framework that responds to the unique needs of people living in Canada in an evidence-based manner.

objectiveThe objective of our study was to achieve consensus from a broad group of Canadian stakeholders on guiding principles and criteria for a framework to assess e-mental health apps in Canada.

methodsWe developed an initial set of guiding principles and criteria from a rapid review and environmental scan of pre-existing app assessment frameworks. The initial list was refined through a two-round modified Delphi process. Participants (N=25) included app developers and users, health care providers, mental health advocates, people with lived experience of a mental health problem or mental illness, policy makers, and researchers. Consensus on each guideline or criterion was defined a priori as at least 70% agreement. The first round of voting was conducted electronically. Prior to Round 2 voting, in-person presentations from experts and a persona empathy mapping process were used to explore the perspectives of diverse stakeholders.

resultsOf all respondents, 68% (17/25) in Round 1 and 100% (13/13) in Round 2 agreed that a framework for evaluating health apps is needed to help Canadian consumers identify high-quality apps. Consensus was reached on 9 guiding principles: evidence based, gender responsive, culturally appropriate, user centered, risk based, internationally aligned, enabling innovation, transparent and fair, and based on ethical norms. In addition, 15 informative and evaluative criteria were defined to assess the effectiveness, functionality, clinical applicability, interoperability, usability, transparency regarding security and privacy, security or privacy standards, supported platforms, targeted users, developers' transparency, funding transparency, price, user desirability, user inclusion, and meaningful inclusion of a diverse range of communities.

conclusionsCanadian mental health stakeholders reached the consensus on a framework of 9 guiding principles and 15 criteria important in assessing e-mental health apps. What differentiates the Canadian framework from other scales is explicit attention to user inclusion at all stages of the development, gender responsiveness, and cultural appropriateness. Furthermore, an empathy mapping process markedly influenced the development of the framework. This framework may be used to inform future mental health policies and programs.

Indexed as

consensusDelphi processevaluation frameworkmental healthmobile phone appstelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID29986846
PMCPMC6056739
OpenAlexW2808871401

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.