Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35044318›Full record

ReviewJMIR mHealth and uHealth2022

Evaluating Evidence-Based Content, Features of Exercise Instruction, and Expert Involvement in Physical Activity Apps for Pregnant Women: Systematic Search and Content Analysis.

Melanie J Hayman, Kristie-Lee Alfrey, Kim Waters, Summer Cannon, Gregore I Mielke, Shelley E Keating, Gabriela P Mena, Michelle F Mottola, Kelly R Evenson, Margie H Davenport and 14 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Pregnancy Apps for Self-Monitoring: Scoping Review of the Most Popular Global Apps Available in Australia.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

24 authors.

Melanie J Hayman *Appleton Institute, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1469-3496
Kristie-Lee Alfrey *Appleton Institute, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6004-3406
Kim Waters *Appleton Institute, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1053-6127
Summer Cannon *Appleton Institute, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3378-5911
Gregore I Mielke *Centre for Research on Exercise, Physical Activity and Health, School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3043-2715
Shelley E Keating *School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5357-2721
Gabriela P Mena *Centre for Research on Exercise, Physical Activity and Health, School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7916-3632
Michelle F Mottola *R Samuel McLaughlin Foundation Exercise and Pregnancy Laboratory, School of Kinesiology, University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8707-4656
Kelly R Evenson *Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-3720-5830
Margie H Davenport *Faculty of Kinesiology, Sport, and Recreation, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5627-5773
S Ariel Barlow *Reproductive Endocrinology & Women's Health Laboratory, Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2098-6810
Emily Budzynski-Seymour *Faculty of Sport, Health and Social Sciences, Solent University, Southampton, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5849-4005
Natalie Comardelle *Reproductive Endocrinology & Women's Health Laboratory, Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-2714-9641
Madison Dickey *Reproductive Endocrinology & Women's Health Laboratory, Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0101-2922
Cheryce L Harrison *Monash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3154-4946
Maryam Kebbe *Reproductive Endocrinology & Women's Health Laboratory, Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7999-9299
Trine Moholdt *Department of Circulation and Medical Imaging, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0003-1024-8088
Lisa J Moran *Monash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5772-6484
Taniya S Nagpal *Faculty of Applied Health Sciences, School of Kinesiology, Brock University, Niagara Region, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1928-1861
Stephanie Schoeppe *Appleton Institute, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1937-876X
Stephanie Alley *Appleton Institute, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9666-5071
Wendy J Brown *Centre for Research on Exercise, Physical Activity and Health, School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9093-4509
Susan Williams *Appleton Institute, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4289-9248
Lisa Vincze *School of Health Sciences and Social Work, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0669-7147

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGuidelines for physical activity and exercise during pregnancy recommend that all women without contraindications engage in regular physical activity to improve both their own health and the health of their baby. Many women are uncertain how to safely engage in physical activity and exercise during this life stage and are increasingly using mobile apps to access health-related information. However, the extent to which apps that provide physical activity and exercise advice align with current evidence-based pregnancy recommendations is unclear.

objectiveThis study aims to conduct a systematic search and content analysis of apps that promote physical activity and exercise in pregnancy to examine the alignment of the content with current evidence-based recommendations; delivery, format, and features of physical activity and exercise instruction; and credentials of the app developers.

methodsSystematic searches were conducted in the Australian App Store and Google Play Store in October 2020. Apps were identified using combinations of search terms relevant to pregnancy and exercise or physical activity and screened for inclusion (with a primary focus on physical activity and exercise during pregnancy, free to download or did not require immediate paid subscription, and an average user rating of ≥4 out of 5). Apps were then independently reviewed using an author-designed extraction tool.

resultsOverall, 27 apps were included in this review (Google Play Store: 16/27, 59%, and App Store: 11/27, 41%). Two-thirds of the apps provided some information relating to the frequency, intensity, time, and type principles of exercise; only 11% (3/27) provided this information in line with current evidence-based guidelines. Approximately one-third of the apps provided information about contraindications to exercise during pregnancy and referenced the supporting evidence. None of the apps actively engaged in screening for potential contraindications. Only 15% (4/27) of the apps collected information about the user's current exercise behaviors, 11% (3/27) allowed users to personalize features relating to their exercise preferences, and a little more than one-third provided information about developer credentials.

conclusionsFew exercise apps designed for pregnancy aligned with current evidence-based physical activity guidelines. None of the apps screened users for contraindications to physical activity and exercise during pregnancy, and most lacked appropriate personalization features to account for an individual's characteristics. Few involved qualified experts during the development of the app. There is a need to improve the quality of apps that promote exercise in pregnancy to ensure that women are appropriately supported to engage in exercise and the potential risk of injury, complications, and adverse pregnancy outcomes for both mother and child is minimized. This could be done by providing expert guidance that aligns with current recommendations, introducing screening measures and features that enable personalization and tailoring to individual users, or by developing a recognized system for regulating apps.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsPregnant PeopleAustraliaExerciseFemaleHumansPregnancyPregnancy Outcomeapp developmentappsevidence-based guidelinesexerciseexercise prescriptionmHealthmobile healthmobile phonephysical activitypregnancysystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35044318
PMCPMC8811692

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.