SynthesisJMIR mHealth and uHealth2020
Standards for Mobile Health-Related Apps: Systematic Review and Development of a Guide.
Synthesis in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers, 6 of them syntheses 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
58 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Improving Acceptability of mHealth Apps-The Use of the Technology Acceptance Model to Assess the Acceptability of mHealth Apps: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Low back pain self-management mobile applications: a systematic review on digital platforms.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 2024Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of Health Management Mobile Applications in COVID-19 Pandemic: Features, Advantages, and Disadvantages.BioMed research international · 2024Pooled it
- Smoking Cessation Apps: A Systematic Review of Format, Outcomes, and Features.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- Effectiveness of Disease-Specific mHealth Apps in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus: Scoping Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2021Pooled it
- Assessment of the Fairness of Privacy Policies of Mobile Health Apps: Scale Development and Evaluation in Cancer Apps.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2020Pooled it
- Use of a Mobile Application for Pelvic Floor Muscle Training in Women With Urinary Incontinence: a Randomized Control Trial.International urogynecology journal · 2024Trial
- Comparing the Use of a Mobile App and a Web-Based Notification Platform for Surveillance of Adverse Events Following Influenza Immunization: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2023Trial
- Feasibility and Usability of Kegel Exercise Pregnancy Training App (KEPT App) among Pregnant Women with Urinary Incontinence.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Trial
- Weather-Enhanced Machine Learning for Time-Resolved Risk Stratification of Clinically Managed Hymenoptera-Related Sting Events in an Urban German Region.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Functionality and quality assessment of Iranian nutrition-related apps using the mobile app rating scale.Journal of education and health promotion · 2026Article
- Digitally delivered, systemically challenged: A qualitative study of health system readiness for digital care.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- An mHealth App and System Architecture for Respiratory Disease Management: Design Principles, Tool Development, and Pilot Usability Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- AppER: Design and Validation of a Mobile Application for Caregivers of Patients with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy and Their Families in Spain and Latin America.Muscles (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Smartphone Apps and Wearables for Health Parameters in Young Adulthood: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Development of a health-tracking tool for the Brazilian population: a pilot study with Brazilian women.BMC public health · 2025Article
- ConciliaMed: an interactive mobile and web tool to reconcile chronic medications of patients undergoing elective surgery.BMJ health & care informatics · 2025Article
- Pervasive Games for Sexual Health Promotion: Scoping Literature Review.JMIR serious games · 2025Review
- Development, implementation and evaluation of a digital treatment for adolescents with chronic pain: a protocol for a multi-phase study.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- French Version of the User Mobile Application Rating Scale: Adaptation and Validation Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn recent years, the considerable increase in the number of mobile health (mHealth) apps has made health care more accessible and affordable for all. However, the exponential growth in mHealth solutions has occurred with almost no control or regulation of any kind. Despite some recent initiatives, there is still no specific regulation procedure, accreditation system, or standards to help the development of the apps, mitigate risks, or guarantee quality.
objectiveThe main aim of this study was to propose a set of criteria for mHealth-related apps on the basis of what is available from published studies, guidelines, and standards in the various areas that are related to health app development.
methodsWe used three sources of information to identify the most important criteria. First, we conducted a systematic review of all the studies published on pain-related apps. Second, we searched for health app recommendations on the websites of professional organizations. Third, we looked for standards governing the development of software for medical devices on the specialized websites of regulatory organizations. Then, we grouped and subsumed the criteria we had identified on the basis of their shared characteristics. Finally, the comprehensibility and perceived importance of the resulting criteria were evaluated for face validity with a group of 18 stakeholders.
resultsWe identified a total of 503 criteria from all sources, which, after close analysis, were grouped into eight different categories, including 36 important criteria for health apps. The resulting categories were usability, privacy, security, appropriateness and suitability, transparency and content, safety, technical support and updates, and technology. The results of the preliminary analysis showed that the criteria were mostly understood by the group of stakeholders. In addition, they perceived all of them as important.
conclusionsThis set of criteria can help health care providers, developers, patients, and other stakeholders to guide the development of mHealth-related apps and, potentially, to measure the quality of an mHealth app.
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.