ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2020
Privacy Assessment in Mobile Health Apps: Scoping Review.
Article 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 40 papers, 3 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
40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Automated Detection of Oral Malignant Lesions Using Deep Learning: Scoping Review and Meta-Analysis.Oral diseases · 2025Pooled it
- Quality Assessment of Digital Health Apps: Umbrella Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Towards Understanding the Usability Attributes of AI-Enabled eHealth Mobile Applications.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2021Pooled it
- Information sharing across mental health service providers and criminal legal system stakeholders: Perspectives of people with serious mental illnesses and their family members.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2022Trial
- Exploring the Adoption of Mobile Health Apps Among Patients with Head and Neck Cancer After the COVID-19 Pandemic: Secondary Analysis of Cross-Sectional Survey.JMIR cancer · 2026Article
- Metadata-Based Privacy Assessment for Mobile mHealth.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Quality and Privacy Policy Compliance of Mental Health Care Apps in China: Cross-Sectional Evaluation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Usability and User Experience Testing of a Co-Designed Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes App ("MyPal for Adults") for Palliative Cancer Care: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Exploration of Reproductive Health Apps' Data Privacy Policies and the Risks Posed to Users: Qualitative Content Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- AI-Enhanced Healthcare: Not a new Paradigm for Informed Consent.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2024Article
- Medical Information Protection in Internet Hospital Apps in China: Scale Development and Content Analysis.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2024Article
- Smartphone applications supporting self-management programme for adults with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Scoping Review.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Assessing the Quality, Privacy, and Security of Breast Cancer Apps for Arabic Speakers: Systematic Search and Review of Smartphone Apps.JMIR cancer · 2024Article
- A Proposal for a Robust Validated Weighted General Data Protection Regulation-Based Scale to Assess the Quality of Privacy Policies of Mobile Health Applications: An eDelphi Study.Methods of information in medicine · 2023Article
- Barriers to and Facilitators of a Blended Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Program for Depression and Anxiety Based on Experiences of University Students: Qualitative Interview Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- The willingness and attitudes of speech-language pathologists towards the use of mobile health technology: a survey study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Critical Criteria and Countermeasures for Mobile Health Developers to Ensure Mobile Health Privacy and Security: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2023Article
- Assessment of App Store Description and Privacy Policy to Explore Ethical and Safety Concerns Associated with the Use of Mental Health Apps for Depression.Indian journal of psychological medicine · 2023Article
- Stakeholders' views and opinions on existing guidelines on "How to Choose Mental Health Apps".Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Development of SkinTracker, an integrated dermatology mobile app and web portal enabling remote clinical research studies.Frontiers in digital health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrivacy has always been a concern, especially in the health domain. The proliferation of mobile health (mHealth) apps has led to a large amount of sensitive data being generated. Some authors have performed privacy assessments of mHealth apps. They have evaluated diverse privacy components; however, different authors have used different criteria for their assessments.
objectiveThis scoping review aims to understand how privacy is assessed for mHealth apps, focusing on the components, scales, criteria, and scoring methods used. A simple taxonomy to categorize the privacy assessments of mHealth apps based on component evaluation is also proposed.
methodsWe followed the methodology defined by Arksey and O'Malley to conduct a scoping review. Included studies were categorized based on the privacy component, which was assessed using the proposed taxonomy.
resultsThe database searches retrieved a total of 710 citations-24 of them met the defined selection criteria, and data were extracted from them. Even though the inclusion criteria considered articles published since 2009, all the studies that were ultimately included were published from 2014 onward. Although 12 papers out of 24 (50%) analyzed only privacy, 8 (33%) analyzed both privacy and security. Moreover, 4 papers (17%) analyzed full apps, with privacy being just part of the assessment. The evaluation criteria used by authors were heterogeneous and were based on their experience, the literature, and/or existing legal frameworks. Regarding the set of items used for the assessments, each article defined a different one. Items included app permissions, analysis of the destination, analysis of the content of communications, study of the privacy policy, use of remote storage, and existence of a password to access the app, among many others. Most of the included studies provided a scoring method that enables the comparison of privacy among apps.
conclusionsThe privacy assessment of mHealth apps is a complex task, as the criteria used by different authors for their evaluations are very heterogeneous. Although some studies about privacy assessment have been conducted, a very large set of items to evaluate privacy has been used up until now. In-app information and privacy policies are primarily utilized by the scientific community to extract privacy information from mHealth apps. The creation of a scale based on more objective criteria is a desirable step forward for privacy assessment in the future.
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.