Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34748515›Full record

ReviewJMIR mHealth and uHealth2021

Mobile Apps Leveraged in the COVID-19 Pandemic in East and South-East Asia: Review and Content Analysis.

Bohee Lee, Siti Aishah Ibrahim, Tiying Zhang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Mobile Apps for COVID-19: A Systematic Review of Reviews.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

3 authors.

Bohee LeeCentre for Population Health Sciences, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9671-386X
Siti Aishah IbrahimFaculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4029-9532
Tiying ZhangCentre for Population Health Sciences, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0175-4317

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic increased attention to digital tools to support governmental public health policies in East and South-East Asia. Mobile apps related to the COVID-19 pandemic continue to emerge and evolve with a wide variety of characteristics and functions. However, there is a paucity of studies evaluating such apps in this region, with most of the available studies conducted in the early days of the pandemic.

objectiveThis study aimed to examine free apps developed or supported by governments in the East and South-East Asian region and highlight their key characteristics and functions. We also sought to interpret how the release dates of these apps were related to the commencement dates of other COVID-19 public health policies.

methodsWe systematically searched for apps in Apple App Store and Google Play Store and analyzed the contents of eligible apps. Mobile apps released or updated with COVID-19-related functions between March 1 and May 7, 2021, in Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, China (mainland), Japan, Thailand, Hong Kong, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines were included. The CoronaNet Research Project database was also examined to determine the timeline of public health policy commencement dates in relation to the release dates of the included apps. We assessed each app's official website, media reports, and literature through content analysis. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize relevant information gathered from the mobile apps using RStudio.

resultsOf the 1943 mobile apps initially identified, 46 were eligible, with almost 70% of the apps being intended for the general public. Most apps were from Vietnam (n=9, 20%), followed by Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand (n=6 each, 13%). Of note, most apps for quarantine monitoring (n=6, 13%) were mandatory for the target users or a population subset. The most common function was health monitoring (32/46, 70%), followed by raising public health awareness (19/46, 41%) through education and information dissemination. Other functions included monitoring quarantine (12/46, 26%), providing health resources (12/46, 26%). COVID-19 vaccination management functions began to appear in parallel with vaccine rollout (7/46, 15%). Regarding the timing of the introduction of mobile solutions, the majority of mobile apps emerged close to the commencement dates of other public health policies in the early stages of the pandemic between March and April 2020.

conclusionsIn East and South-East Asia, most governments used mobile health apps as adjuncts to public health measures for tracking COVID-19 cases and delivering credible information. In addition, these apps have evolved by expanding their functions for COVID-19 vaccination.

Indexed as

COVID-19Mobile ApplicationsChinaCOVID-19 VaccinesHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2COVID-19 VaccinesapplicationscoronavirusCOVID-19digital healtheHealthhealth policymHealthmobile appsmobile healthpandemicpublic healthtelehealthtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID34748515
PMCPMC8589041

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.