ArticleNPJ digital medicine2021
Assessing the quality of mobile applications in chronic disease management: a scoping review.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 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
37 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- mHealth To Promote Monitoring and Self-Regulation Among Caregivers of People With Dementia: A Systematic Review.PsyCh journal · 2026Pooled it
- Health Providers' Perceptions and Experiences of Using mHealth for Chronic Noncommunicable Diseases: Qualitative Systematic Review and Meta-Synthesis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- The impact of mobile health applications on the outcomes of patients with chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of medicine and life · 2023Pooled it
- Impact of a Mobile Application for Tracking Nausea and Vomiting During Pregnancy (NVP) on NVP Symptoms, Quality of Life, and Decisional Conflict Regarding NVP Treatments: MinSafeStart Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Trial
- Selecting and Evaluating Mobile Health Apps for the Healthy Life Trajectories Initiative: Development of the eHealth Resource Checklist.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2021Trial
- Health System- and Payer-Level Decision-Making Processes Influencing the Adoption and Sustainability of Patient-Facing Digital Health Tools: Qualitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Exploring Self-Management-Based Mobile Health User Typologies and Associations Between User Types and Satisfaction With Key Mobile Health Functions: Comparative Study of Various Fitness and Weight Management App User Types.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- From usability to clinical impact: a systematic review of digital technologies for motor rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- The Impact of Mobile Health Literacy, Socioeconomic Factors, and Engagement Patterns on DiabetesXcel App Usage in Adults.Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders · 2025Article
- Health education interventions for individuals with visual or hearing impairment: a scoping review.BMC public health · 2025Article
- A choice based conjoint analysis of mobile healthcare application preferences among physicians, patients, and individuals.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Codevelopment of an mHealth App With Health Care Providers, Digital Health Experts, Community Partners, and Families for Childhood Obesity Management: Protocol for a Co-Design Process.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Challenges and Alternatives to Evaluation Methods and Regulation Approaches for Medical Apps as Mobile Medical Devices: International and Multidisciplinary Focus Group Discussion.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- A scoping review assessing the usability of digital health technologies targeting people with multiple sclerosis.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- The value of circadian heart rate variability for the estimation of obstructive sleep apnea severity in adult males.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2024Article
- Clinical Validation of Digital Healthcare Solutions: State of the Art, Challenges and Opportunities.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Article
- What's Next in MHealth Apps in Rehabilitation: Re-Directing Our Attention to Evaluating Quality.Physiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie Canada · 2024Article
- Attributes, Quality, and Downloads of Dementia-Related Mobile Apps for Patients With Dementia and Their Caregivers: App Review and Evaluation Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Evaluation of Mobile Applications for Patients with Diabetes Mellitus: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While there has been a rapid growth of digital health apps to support chronic diseases, clear standards on how to best evaluate the quality of these evolving tools are absent. This scoping review aims to synthesize the emerging field of mobile health app quality assessment by reviewing criteria used by previous studies to assess the quality of mobile apps for chronic disease management. A literature review was conducted in September 2017 for published studies that use a set of quality criteria to directly evaluate two or more patient-facing apps supporting promote chronic disease management. This resulted in 8182 citations which were reviewed by research team members, resulting in 65 articles for inclusion. An inductive coding schema to synthesize the quality criteria utilized by included articles was developed, with 40 unique quality criteria identified. Of the 43 (66%) articles that reported resources used to support criteria selection, 19 (29%) used clinical guidelines, and 10 (15%) used behavior change theory. The most commonly used criteria included the presence of user engagement or behavior change functions (97%, n = 63) and technical features of the app such as customizability (20%, n = 13, while Usability was assessed by 24 studies (36.9%). This study highlights the significant variation in quality criteria employed for the assessment of mobile health apps. Future methods for app evaluation will benefit from approaches that leverage the best evidence regarding the clinical impact and behavior change mechanisms while more directly reflecting patient needs when evaluating the quality of apps.
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.