ArticleJournal of affective disorders reports2021
Quality evaluation of stress, anxiety and depression apps for COVID-19.
Article in Journal of affective disorders reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital Interventions for Reducing Loneliness and Depression in Korean College Students: Mixed Methods Evaluation.JMIR formative research · 2024Trial
- Effects of Mobile-Based Forest-Therapy Programs Using Urban Forests for Symptoms of Depressed Patients.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Chatbot-Delivered Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in Adolescents With Depression and Anxiety During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Feasibility and Acceptability Study.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- Mental Health Mobile Apps in the French App Store: Assessment Study of Functionality and Quality.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCOVID-19 has caused increased stress, anxiety and depression with increased barriers to treatment. Mobile apps offer a potential solution, but there is no information on the quality of such apps recommended for COVID-19. This study aims to evaluate the quality of stress, anxiety and depression apps recommended for COVID-19.
methodsA search was conducted to identify relevant apps on the iOS and Android platforms. 44 apps were evaluated using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS), and the American Psychiatric Association's app evaluation model for data privacy and security.
resultsOverall quality scores of iOS and Android apps were 3.69 ± 0.43 and 3.66 ± 0.47. Thirty percent had good/excellent overall scores. In general, the iOS and Android versions of the apps scored best for functionality (4.21 ± 0.48, 4.12 ± 0.53), followed by aesthetics (3.84 ± 0.50, 3.78 ± 0.56), information (3.39 ± 0.54, 3.40 ± 0.60), and engagement (3.31 ± 0.81, 3.34 ± 0.84). Over half (59%) shared personal information with third parties and 14% were compliant with data protection standards. LIMITATIONS: Only free apps available in Singapore were evaluated. Our results are time sensitive due to addition, removal, and update of apps in the app stores, thus our results should be extrapolated with caution to apps from other countries and paid apps.
conclusionApps that addressed all three conditions had the highest overall quality scores. The top ranked apps (Sanvello, Woebot, Happify, Youper, Bloom) were of good quality, but majority were of acceptable quality and had room for improvement. App developers are encouraged to use our findings to improve and develop better quality apps.
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.