Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33904827›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2021

Influences on the Uptake of Health and Well-being Apps and Curated App Portals: Think-Aloud and Interview Study.

Dorothy Szinay, Olga Perski, Andy Jones, Tim Chadborn, Jamie Brown, Felix Naughton

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Current challenges for evaluating mobile health applications.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Dorothy SzinaySchool of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2722-6758
Olga PerskiDepartment of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3285-3174
Andy JonesSchool of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3130-9313
Tim ChadbornBehavioural Insights, Public Health England, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6264-3843
Jamie BrownDepartment of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2797-5428
Felix NaughtonSchool of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9790-2796
University of East Anglia · GBUniversity College London · GBPublic Health England · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 22962Cancer Research UK C1417/A22962Medical Research Council MR/S037519/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth and well-being smartphone apps can provide a cost-effective solution to addressing unhealthy behaviors. The selection of these apps tends to occur in commercial app stores, where thousands of health apps are available. Their uptake is often influenced by popularity indicators. However, these indicators are not necessarily associated with app effectiveness or evidence-based content. Alternative routes to app selection are increasingly available, such as via curated app portals, but little is known about people's experiences of them.

objectiveThe aim of this study is to explore how people select health apps on the internet and their views on curated app portals.

methodsA total of 18 UK-based adults were recruited through social media and asked during an in-person meeting to verbalize their thoughts while searching for a health or well-being app on the internet on a platform of their choice. The search was then repeated on 2 curated health app portals: the National Health Service Apps Library and the Public Health England One You App portal. This was followed by semistructured interviews. Data were analyzed using framework analysis, informed by the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behavior model and the Theoretical Domains Framework.

resultsSearching for health and well-being apps on the internet was described as a minefield. App uptake appeared to be influenced by participants' capabilities such as app literacy skills and health and app awareness, and opportunities including the availability of apps, app esthetics, the price of an app, and social influences. Motivation factors that seemed to affect the uptake were perceived competence, time efficiency, perceived utility and accuracy of an app, transparency about data protection, commitment and social identity, and a wide range of emotions. Social influences and the perceived utility of an app were highlighted as particularly important. Participants were not previously aware of curated portals but found the concept appealing. Curated health app portals appeared to engender trust and alleviate data protection concerns. Although apps listed on these were perceived as more trustworthy, their presentation was considered disappointing. This disappointment seemed to stem from the functionality of the portals, lack of user guidance, and lack of tailored content to an individual's needs.

conclusionsThe uptake of health and well-being apps appears to be primarily affected by social influences and the perceived utility of an app. App uptake via curated health app portals perceived as credible may mitigate concerns related to data protection and accuracy, but their implementation must better meet user needs and expectations.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsAdultEnglandHumansMotivationState Medicinebehavior changeCapability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behavior modelframework analysishealth appsmHealthmobile phonesmartphone appTheoretical Domains Frameworkthink aloud

Identifiers

PMID33904827
PMCPMC8114158
OpenAlexW3118600449

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.