Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34733541›Full record

ArticleDigital health

A process for reviewing mental health apps: Using the One Mind PsyberGuide Credibility Rating System.

Martha Neary, John Bunyi, Kristina Palomares, David C Mohr, Adam Powell, Josef Ruzek, Leanne M Williams, Til Wykes, Stephen M Schueller

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  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
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

9 authors.

Martha NearyDepartment of Psychological Science, University of California, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1253-3459
John BunyiDepartment of Psychological Science, University of California, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA.
Kristina PalomaresDepartment of Psychological Science, University of California, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA.
David C MohrCenter for Behavioral Intervention Technologies, Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA.
Adam PowellPayer+Provider Syndicate, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6519-3120
Josef RuzekPalo Alto University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Leanne M WilliamsDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Til WykesInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Stephen M SchuellerDepartment of Psychological Science, University of California, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA.

Funding

Technology Enabled Services for Coordinated Care of Depression in Healthcare SettingsP50MH119029 · NIMH · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI DAVID CURTIS MOHR, Jessica Lee Schleider · 2020 to 2026
$10.7M
NIMH NIH HHS P50 MH119029
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveGiven the increasing number of publicly available mental health apps, we need independent advice to guide adoption. This paper discusses the challenges and opportunities of current mental health app rating systems and describes the refinement process of one prominent system, the One Mind PsyberGuide Credibility Rating Scale (PGCRS).

methodsPGCRS Version 1 was developed in 2013 and deployed for 7 years, during which time a number of limitations were identified. Version 2 was created through multiple stages, including a review of evaluation guidelines and consumer research, input from scientific experts, testing, and evaluation of face validity. We then re-reviewed 161 mental health apps using the updated rating scale, investigated the reliability and discrepancy of initial scores, and updated ratings on the One Mind PsyberGuide public app guide.

resultsReliabilities across the scale's 9 items ranged from -0.10 to 1.00, demonstrating that some characteristics of apps are more difficult to rate consistently. The average overall score of the 161 reviewed mental health apps was 2.51/5.00 (range 0.33-5.00). Ratings were not strongly correlated with app store star ratings, suggesting that credibility scores provide different information to what is contained in star ratings.

conclusionPGCRS summarizes and weights available information in 4 domains: intervention specificity, consumer ratings, research, and development. Final scores are created through an iterative process of initial rating and consensus review. The process of updating this rating scale and integrating it into a procedure for evaluating apps demonstrates one method for determining app quality.

Indexed as

digital mental healthevaluationmental healthmHealthmobile health

Identifiers

PMID34733541
PMCPMC8558599

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.