ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2022
[Great potential, little substance : Overview of quality and quantity of urological apps in the German app store].
Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe range of medical apps is broad and diverse. The previous evaluations are inconsistent and limited to the respective areas of application.
objectivesThe main objective of this work is to comprehensively present, organize, and evaluate the current range of urological apps with the help of a semi-automatic retrospective app store analysis (SARASA).
methodsApplication of an adaptable method based on filter processes according to predefined criteria by means of SARASA to characterize urological apps from various subject areas in the Apple App Store with subsequent manual filtering and evaluation.
resultsFrom the original list of 34,830 apps in the "Medicine" category of the Apple App Store on 27 September 2021, 3556 apps remained after apps without a German-language store description were removed. 43 subject-specific apps remained for further analysis and description. The number of reviews, rating, topicality, urological issues, technical support and richness of content were taken into account. The two most relevant apps for each topic are presented in detail.
conclusionSARASA offers an easy-to-use method for applying filter processes to identify apps in app stores that meet predefined, formal criteria. The highest number of apps can be classified in categories of patient information and further education and training. An app officially listed by the German Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Products (BfArM) in the sense of a digital health application (DiGA), the costs of which are reimbursed by the health insurance companies, is available for urology in only one single case. The authors see great potential for future developments in this regard.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34862517What 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.