ReviewJournal of community genetics2022
Patient-facing genetic and genomic mobile apps in the UK: a systematic review of content, functionality, and quality.
Review in Journal of community genetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of menopause apps with an emphasis on osteoporosis.BMC women's health · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Patients and donors trust in data authorization for AI-based medical research.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Personalized Support in Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer After Genetic Counseling by the Chatbot-Based GENIE Mobile App: Proof-of-Concept Wizard of Oz Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Co-designing 'gene', a smartphone app for genetics education and empowerment with and for the British Pakistani community: a methodological summary of the GENE-Ed project.Journal of community genetics · 2025Article
- Participant Contributions to Person-Generated Health Data Research Using Mobile Devices: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Deciphering the needs of patients with hereditary breast and ovarian Cancer in the Process of Genetic Counseling to Inform the Development of a Mobile Support App: a qualitative study in Germany.Journal of community genetics · 2024Article
- Article
- Wikipedia as an academic service-learning tool in science and technology: higher education case from Siberia.Journal of community genetics · 2024Article
- Digital interventions for genomics and genetics education, empowerment, and service engagement: A systematic review.Journal of community genetics · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Close relative (consanguineous) marriage is widely practised globally, and it increases the risk of genetic disorders. Mobile apps may increase awareness and education regarding the associated risks in a sensitive, engaging, and accessible manner. This systematic review of patient-facing genetic/genomic mobile apps explores content, function, and quality. We searched the NHS Apps Library and the UK Google Play and Apple App stores for patient-facing genomic/genetic smartphone apps. Descriptive information and information on content was extracted and summarized. Readability was examined using the Flesch-Kincaid metrics. Two raters assessed each app, using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) and the IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics functionality score. A total of 754 apps were identified, of which 22 met the eligibility criteria. All apps intended to inform/educate users, while 32% analyzed genetic data, and 18% helped to diagnose genetic conditions. Most (68%) were clearly about genetics, but only 14% were affiliated with a medical/health body or charity, and only 36% had a privacy strategy. Mean reading scores were 35 (of 100), with the average reading age being equivalent to US grade 12 (UK year 13). On average, apps had 3.3 of the 11 IMS functionality criteria. The mean MARS quality score was 3.2 ± 0.7. Half met the minimum acceptability score (3 of 5). None had been formally evaluated. It was evident that there are few high-quality genomic/genetic patient-facing apps available in the UK. This demonstrates a need for an accessible, culturally sensitive, evidence-based app to improve genetic literacy within patient populations and specific communities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.