ReviewNPJ digital medicine2020
Actionable health app evaluation: translating expert frameworks into objective metrics.
Review in NPJ digital medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 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
69 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Self-Management Support Apps for Spinal Cord Injury: Results of a Systematic Search in App Stores and Mobile App Rating Scale Evaluation.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2024Pooled it
- Evaluation of Digital Mental Health Technologies in the United States: Systematic Literature Review and Framework Synthesis.JMIR mental health · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Determinants of Digital Health Resource Utilization Among Individuals With Self-Reported Bipolar Disorder in Germany-A Cross-Sectional Study Based on the Andersen Model.Bipolar disorders · 2026Article
- The Quality and Characteristics of Digital Mental Health Apps: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- SeniorHealth Tracker application to support the elderly: technological innovation leveraging humanisation.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Facts label for transparent communication of AI Risks in mental health technology.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Five years of app evaluation: Insights from a framework in practice - a systematic review on the m-health index and navigation database.Internet interventions · 2025Article
- Mindbench.ai: an actionable platform to evaluate the profile and performance of large language models in a mental healthcare context.NPP - digital psychiatry and neuroscience · 2025Article
- Living well? The unintended consequences of highly popular commercial fitness apps through social listening using Machine-Assisted Topic Analysis: Evidence from X.British journal of health psychology · 2025Article
- mHealth Applications for Childhood Anxiety Disorders: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions.Current psychiatry reports · 2025Review
- A Brief Video-Based Intervention to Improve Digital Health Literacy for Individuals With Bipolar Disorder: Intervention Development and Results of a Single-Arm Quantitative Pilot Study.Journal of participatory medicine · 2025Article
- Mental Health Apps Available in App Stores for Indian Users: Protocol for a Systematic Review.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Article
- Developing a standardized framework for evaluating health apps using natural language processing.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Testing and Iterative Improvement of the CEN ISO/TS 82304-2 Health App Quality Assessment: Pilot Interrater Reliability Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Mental health apps in India: regulatory landscape and future directions.BJPsych international · 2025Review
- Increased vegetable consumption in Japan using an incentivized health communication campaign with a quiz.Journal of nutritional science · 2025Article
- A Narrative Review of the Digital Equity Gap of Apps for Cigarette Smoking Cessation for Persons Living in the Hispanosphere.Current addiction reports · 2024Article
- Assessing Digital Phenotyping for App Recommendations and Sustained Engagement: Cohort Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
9 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As use and availability of mobile health apps have increased, so too has the need for a thorough, accessible framework for app evaluation. The American Psychiatric Association's app evaluation model has emerged as a way to critically assess an app by considering accessibility, privacy and security, clinical foundation, engagement, and interoperability; however, there is no centralized database where users can view how various health apps perform when assessed via the APA model. In this perspective, we propose and outline our effort to translate the APA's model for the evaluation of health apps into a set of objective metrics that can be published online, making the framework actionable and accessible to a broad audience. The questions from the APA model were operationalized into 105 objective questions that are either binary or numeric. These questions serve as the foundation of an online database, where app evaluation consists of answering these 105 questions and can be crowdsourced. While the database has yet to be published and crowdsourced, initial internal testing demonstrated excellent interrater reliability. The database proposed here introduces a public and interactive approach to data collection that is guided by the APA model. The published product enables users to sort through the many mobile health apps and filter them according to individual preferences and priorities, making the ever-growing health app market more navigable.
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.