Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35072646›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2022

Attitudes Toward Mobile Apps for Pandemic Research Among Smartphone Users in Germany: National Survey.

Lorina Buhr, Silke Schicktanz, Eike Nordmeyer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
9.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lorina Buhr *Department of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0718-6026
Silke Schicktanz *Department of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9627-752X
Eike NordmeyerDepartment of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8384-0942
Universitätsmedizin Göttingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, but also in the context of previous epidemic diseases, mobile apps for smartphones were developed with different goals and functions, such as digital contact tracing, test management, symptom monitoring, quarantine compliance, and epidemiological and public health research.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to explore the potential for the acceptance of research-orientated apps (ROAs) in the German population. To this end, we identified distinctive attitudes toward pandemic apps and data sharing for research purposes among smartphone users in general and with a focus on differences in attitudes between app users and nonusers in particular.

methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional, national, telephone-based survey of 1003 adults in Germany, of which 924 were useable for statistical analysis. The 17-item survey assessed current usage of pandemic apps, motivations for using or not using pandemic apps, trust in app distributors and attitudes toward data handling (data storage and transmission), willingness to share coded data with researchers using a pandemic app, social attitudes toward app use, and demographic and personal characteristics.

resultsA vast majority stated that they used a smartphone (778/924, 84.2%), but less than half of the smartphone users stated that they used a pandemic app (326/778, 41.9%). The study focused on the subsample of smartphone users. Interestingly, when asked about preferred organizations for data storage and app distribution, trust in governmental (federal or state government, regional health office), public-appointed (statutory health insurance), or government-funded organizations (research institutes) was much higher than in private organizations (private research institutions, clinics, health insurances, information technology [IT] companies). Having a university degree significantly (P<.001) increased the likelihood of using a pandemic app, while having a migration background significantly (P<.001) decreased it. The overwhelming majority (653/778, 83.9%) of smartphone users were willing to provide their app data for state-funded research. Regarding attitudes toward app usage, striking differences between users and nonusers were found. Almost all app users (317/327, 96.9%) stated they would be willing to share data, whereas only 74.3% (336/452) of nonusers supported data sharing via an app. Two-thirds (216/326, 66.3%) of app users fully or rather agreed with the statement that using a pandemic app is a social duty, whereas almost the same proportion of nonusers entirely or rather disagreed with that statement (273/451, 60.5%).

conclusionsThese findings indicate a high potential for the adoption of ROAs among smartphone users in Germany as long as organizational providers engaged in development, operation, and distribution are state-funded or governmental institutions and transparency about data-using research institutions is provided.

Indexed as

COVID-19Mobile ApplicationsAdultAttitudeCross-Sectional StudiesGermanyHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2SmartphoneCOVID-19data donationdata sharingdigital healthethicsGermanyhealth applicationsmHealthmobile applicationsmobile appspandemicsmartphone appstelephone-based surveytrustuser

Identifiers

PMID35072646
PMCPMC8822425
OpenAlexW4207072049

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.