Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30526243›Full record

SynthesisAmerican journal of men's health

Systematic Review of Commercially Available Mobile Phone Applications for Prostate Cancer Education.

Otis L Owens, Jenay M Beer, Ligia I Reyes, Tracey L Thomas

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in American journal of men's health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. [Digital innovation in medicine: the COVID-19 pandemic as an accelerator of "digital health"].Journal fur Urologie und Urogynakologie : Zeitschrift fur Urologie und Urogynakologie in Klinik und Praxis · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Safety concerns with consumer-facing mobile health applications and their consequences: a scoping review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Otis L Owens1 College of Social Work, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1023-1449
Jenay M Beer2 College of Public Health, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA.
Ligia I Reyes3 Department of Health Promotion Education and Behavior, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.
Tracey L Thomas4 Health Sciences Department, Health and Behavioral Studies College, James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8413-7044
University of South Carolina · USJames Madison University · USUniversity of Georgia · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed non-skin cancer among all men and the second most common cause of death. To ameliorate the burden of prostate cancer, there is a critical need to identify strategies for providing men with information about prostate cancer screening and the importance of informed decision making. With mobile phones becoming more ubiquitous, many individuals are adopting their phones as sources for health information. The objective of this systematic review is to identify and evaluate commercially available apps for promoting informed prostate cancer screening decisions. Two keywords "prostate cancer screening" and "prostate cancer" were entered into the search engines of Google and iOS app stores in May 2017. Evaluations were conducted on apps' (a) quality, (b) grade-level readability, (c) cultural sensitivity, and (d) usability heuristics. None of the 14 apps meeting the inclusion criteria contained the full breadth of information covered in the 2016 American Cancer Society's Prostate Cancer Prevention and Early Detection Guidelines, but over half were inclusive of topics consistent with these guidelines. Most apps' readability was higher than an eighth-grade reading level. Most apps were also not framed and had a neutral tone. Only four apps met most criteria for being culturally sensitive to African Americans. Usability among apps was variable, but some contained major usability concerns. Recommendations for improving educational apps for prostate cancer screening include: disseminating evidence-based information; using culturally sensitive language; knowing the implications of the one and framing of content; making apps interactive; and following common usability principles.

Indexed as

Decision MakingMobile ApplicationsCell PhoneClinical CompetenceEarly Detection of CancerHealth PersonnelHumansMaleProstatic Neoplasmsdecision makingearly detection of cancermobile applicationsprostatic neoplasmsreview

Identifiers

PMID30526243
PMCPMC6775560
OpenAlexW2905051336

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.