ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2018
An Assessment Framework for e-Mental Health Apps in Canada: Results of a Modified Delphi Process.
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.
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.
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.
Evaluating the Impact of a Smartphone App on Health Outcomes and Treatment Adherence in Adolescents With Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Mixed Method Quasi-Experimental Study
Who cites it
38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 76 citations in OpenAlex.
- Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) 2023 Update on Clinical Guidelines for Management of Major Depressive Disorder in Adults: Réseau canadien pour les traitements de l'humeur et de l'anxiété (CANMAT) 2023 : Mise à jour des lignes directrices cliniques pour la prise en charge du trouble dépressif majeur chez les adultes.Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2024Guideline
- Codevelopment of a Digital Screening and Intervention Tool to Improve Lifestyle Habits in Children: Focus Group Study With Parents and Clinicians.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2026Article
- 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 · 2025Article
- Validation and selection of criteria for evaluating apps for managing depression: a Delphi study.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Developing a Behavioral Phenotyping Layer for Artificial Intelligence-Driven Predictive Analytics in a Digital Resiliency Course: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Essential Design Principles for a Family Digital Mental Health Intervention: A Delphi Study.Journal of marital and family therapy · 2025Article
- Testing the Effectiveness of a Mobile Smartphone App Designed to Improve the Mental Health of Junior Physicians: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
- 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 · 2024Article
- Article
- Evaluation of Chinese HIV Mobile Apps by Researchers and Patients With HIV: Quality Evaluation Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2024Article
- A sociotechnical framework to assess patient-facing eHealth tools: results of a modified Delphi process.NPJ digital medicine · 2023Article
- Understanding Mobile Health and Youth Mental Health: Scoping Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2023Article
- Assessing the Quality and Impact of eHealth Tools: Systematic Literature Review and Narrative Synthesis.JMIR human factors · 2023Review
- Critical Criteria and Countermeasures for Mobile Health Developers to Ensure Mobile Health Privacy and Security: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2023Article
- Female youth and mental health service providers' perspectives on the JoyPop™ app: a qualitative study.Frontiers in digital health · 2023Article
- Stakeholders' views and opinions on existing guidelines on "How to Choose Mental Health Apps".Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Mental Health Mobile Apps in the French App Store: Assessment Study of Functionality and Quality.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Article
- Comparing Professional and Consumer Ratings of Mental Health Apps: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- Alberta Rating Index for Apps: Study of Reliability and Validity.Canadian journal of occupational therapy. Revue canadienne d'ergotherapie · 2022Article
- Review of Mobile Apps for Women With Anxiety in Pregnancy: Maternity Care Professionals' Guide to Locating and Assessing Anxiety Apps.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.