ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2022
Japanese Version of the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS): Development and Validation.
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, 1 of them a synthesis 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evaluation of fatty liver disease self-care applications: a systematic review and evaluation of apps using the mobile application rating scale (MARS).BMC gastroenterology · 2026Pooled it
- Assessing the Efficacy of the INTELLECT Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Mobile App for Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms Among At-Risk Japanese Employees: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2025Trial
- Effects of a Transtheoretical Model-Based mHealth Intervention on Transition Readiness in Adolescents With Epilepsy: Quasi-Experimental Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2025Article
- Corrigendum to "Behaviour change techniques, intervention features and usability of diet apps" [Prevent. Med. Rep. 54 (2025) 103085].Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- Behaviour change techniques, intervention features and usability of diet apps.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- Mental Health Apps Available in App Stores for Indian Users: Protocol for a Systematic Review.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- An Explainable AI Application (AF'fective) to Support Monitoring of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation After Catheter Ablation: Qualitative Focus Group, Design Session, and Interview Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Translation and validation of the traditional Chinese Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS-TW) for evaluating mHealth apps.mHealth · 2025Article
- Cultural Adaptation of the Actionable Health App Evaluation in Japan: Protocol for a Web-Based Modified Delphi Expert Consensus Study.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Utilization of patient portals: a cross-sectional study investigating associations with mobile app quality.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023Article
- App-based oral health promotion interventions on modifiable risk factors associated with early childhood caries: A systematic review.Frontiers in oral health · 2023Review
- A Systematic Assessment of the Quality of Smartphone Applications for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.Gastro hep advances · 2023Article
- The Persian Version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS-Fa): Translation and Validation Study.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- Evaluating and rating HIV/AIDS mobile apps using the feature-based application rating method and mobile app rating scale.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe number of mobile health (mHealth) apps continues to rise each year. Widespread use of the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) has allowed objective and multidimensional evaluation of the quality of these apps. However, no Japanese version of MARS has been made available to date.
objectiveThe purposes of this study were (1) to develop a Japanese version of MARS and (2) to assess the translated version's reliability and validity in evaluating mHealth apps.
methodsTo develop the Japanese version of MARS, cross-cultural adaptation was used using a universalist approach. A total of 50 mental health apps were evaluated by 2 independent raters. Internal consistency and interrater reliability were then calculated. Convergent and divergent validity were assessed using multitrait scaling analysis and concurrent validity.
resultsAfter cross-cultural adaptation, all 23 items from the original MARS were included in the Japanese version. Following translation, back-translation, and review by the author of the original MARS, a Japanese version of MARS was finalized. Internal consistency was acceptable by all subscales of objective and subjective quality (Cronbach α=.78-.89). Interrater reliability was deemed acceptable, with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) ranging from 0.61 to 0.79 for all subscales, except for "functionality," which had an ICC of 0.40. Convergent/divergent validity and concurrent validity were also considered acceptable. The rate of missing responses was high in several items in the "information" subscale.
conclusionsA Japanese version of MARS was developed and shown to be reliable and valid to a degree that was comparable to the original MARS. This Japanese version of MARS can be used as a standard to evaluate the quality and credibility of mHealth apps.
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.