Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34254938›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2021

Barriers to and Facilitators for Using Nutrition Apps: Systematic Review and Conceptual Framework.

Laura Maria König, Christiane Attig, Thomas Franke, Britta Renner

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
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 86 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
86citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

86 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Inequalities in Exclusively Mobile Interventions Targeting Weight-Related Behaviors: Systematic Review of Observational Studies.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Identifying Social Media-Based Interactions That Help Adults to Adhere to Weight Loss Goals: A Systematic Review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. A Scoping Review of the Mechanisms Influencing Socioeconomic Disparities in Outcomes of Digital Interventions for Weight-Related Behaviors.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2026
    Article
  20. Article

26 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors.

Laura Maria KönigDepartment of Psychology, University of Konstanz, Universitätsstraße 10, Konstanz, DE.
Christiane AttigDepartment of Psychology, Chemnitz University of Technology, Chemnitz, DE.
Thomas FrankeInstitute for Multimedia and Interactive Systems, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, DE.
Britta RennerDepartment of Psychology, University of Konstanz, Universitätsstraße 10, Konstanz, DE.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNutrition apps are effective in changing eating behavior and diet-related health risk factors. However, while they may curb growing overweight and obesity rates, widespread adoption is yet to be achieved. Hence, profound knowledge regarding factors motivating and hindering (long-term) nutrition app use is crucial for developing design guidelines aimed at supporting uptake and prolonged use of nutrition apps.

objectiveIn this systematic review, we synthesized the literature on barriers to and facilitators for nutrition app use across disciplines including empirical qualitative and quantitative studies with current users, ex-users, and nonusers of nutrition apps.

methodsA systematic literature search including 6 databases (PubMed, Web of Science, PsychINFO, PSYNDEX, PsycArticles, and SPORTDiscus) as well as backward and forward citation search was conducted. Search strategy, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the planned data extraction process were preregistered. All empirical qualitative and quantitative studies published in German or English were eligible for inclusion if they examined adolescents (aged 13-18) or adults who were either current users, ex-users, and nonusers of nutrition apps. Based on qualitative content analysis, extracted individual barriers and facilitators were grouped into categories.

resultsA total of 28 publications were identified as eligible. A framework with a 3-level hierarchy was designed which grouped 328 individual barriers and facilitators into 23 subcategories, 12 categories, and 4 clusters that focus on either the individual user (goal setting and goal striving, motivation, routines, lack of awareness of knowledge), different aspects of the app and the smartphone (features, usability of the app or food database, technical issues, data security, accuracy/trustworthiness, costs), positive and negative outcomes of nutrition app use, or interactions between the user and their social environment.

conclusionsThe resulting conceptual framework underlines a pronounced diversity of reasons for (not) using nutrition apps, indicating that there is no "one-size-fits-all" approach for uptake and prolonged use of nutrition apps. Hence, tailoring nutrition apps to needs of specific user groups seems promising for increasing engagement.

Identifiers

PMID34254938
PMCPMC8409150

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.