Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30949436›Full record

ArticleInternet interventions2019

Availability, readability, and content of privacy policies and terms of agreements of mental health apps.

Julie M Robillard, Tanya L Feng, Arlo B Sporn, Jen-Ai Lai, Cody Lo, Monica Ta, Roland Nadler

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Internet interventions, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Structuring privacy policy: an AI approach.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025
    Article
  8. Leveraging Trauma Informed Care for Digital Health Intervention Development in Opioid Use Disorder.Journal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

7 authors.

Julie M RobillardDivision of Neurology, Department of Medicine, The University of British Columbia, B404 - 4480 Oak Street, Vancouver, BC V6H 3N1, Canada.
Tanya L FengDivision of Neurology, Department of Medicine, The University of British Columbia, B404 - 4480 Oak Street, Vancouver, BC V6H 3N1, Canada.
Arlo B SpornDivision of Neurology, Department of Medicine, The University of British Columbia, B404 - 4480 Oak Street, Vancouver, BC V6H 3N1, Canada.
Jen-Ai LaiDivision of Neurology, Department of Medicine, The University of British Columbia, B404 - 4480 Oak Street, Vancouver, BC V6H 3N1, Canada.
Cody LoDivision of Neurology, Department of Medicine, The University of British Columbia, B404 - 4480 Oak Street, Vancouver, BC V6H 3N1, Canada.
Monica TaDivision of Neurology, Department of Medicine, The University of British Columbia, B404 - 4480 Oak Street, Vancouver, BC V6H 3N1, Canada.
Roland NadlerUniversity of Ottawa Centre for Health Law, Policy and Ethics, Common Law Section, Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa, 57 Louis Pasteur (Fauteux Hall), Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the availability, readability, and privacy-related content of the privacy policies and terms of agreement of mental health apps available through popular digital stores. MATERIALS AND

methodsPopular smartphone app stores were searched using combinations of keywords "track" and "mood" and their synonyms. The first 100 apps from each search were evaluated for inclusion and exclusion criteria. Apps were assessed for availability of a privacy policy (PP) and terms of agreement (ToA) and if available, these documents were evaluated for both content and readability.

resultsMost of the apps collected in the sample did not include a PP or ToA. PPs could be accessed for 18% of iOS apps and 4% of Android apps; whereas ToAs were available for 15% of iOS and 3% of Android apps. Many PPs stated that users' information may be shared with third parties (71% iOS, 46% Android). DISCUSSION: Results demonstrate that information collection is occurring with the majority of apps that allow users to track the status of their mental health. Most of the apps collected in the initial sample did not include a PP or ToA despite this being a requirement by the store. The majority of PPs and ToAs that were evaluated are written at a post-secondary reading level and disclose that extensive data collection is occurring.

conclusionOur findings raise concerns about consent, transparency, and data sharing associated with mental health apps and highlight the importance of improved regulation in the mobile app environment.

Indexed as

AppsMental healthMobile healthPrivacySmartphone

Identifiers

PMID30949436
PMCPMC6430038

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.