Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35319482›Full record

ReviewJournal of medical Internet research2022

Review of Mobile Apps for Women With Anxiety in Pregnancy: Maternity Care Professionals' Guide to Locating and Assessing Anxiety Apps.

Kerry Evans, Jasper Donelan, Stefan Rennick-Egglestone, Serena Cox, Yvonne Kuipers

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of medical Internet research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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
  14. Article
  15. Users' perceptions of the "My Medicine" mobile app usability.Journal of public health research · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kerry Evans *School of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1381-9168
Jasper Donelan *Digital Research, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7007-6604
Stefan Rennick-Egglestone *School of Health Sciences, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4187-011X
Serena Cox *School of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4983-026X
Yvonne Kuipers *Edinburgh Napier University, School of Health and Social Care, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4200-0522
University of Nottingham · GBEdinburgh Napier University · GB

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-0615-20016
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMental health and pregnancy apps are widely available and have the potential to improve health outcomes and enhance women's experience of pregnancy. Women frequently access digital information throughout their pregnancy. However, health care providers and women have little information to guide them toward potentially helpful or effective apps.

objectiveThis review aimed to evaluate a methodology for systematically searching and reviewing commercially available apps that support pregnant women with symptoms of anxiety in order to assist maternity care professionals in identifying resources that they could recommend for these women.

methodsA stepwise systematic approach was used to identify, select, describe, and assess the most popular and highly user-rated apps available in the United Kingdom from January to March 2021. This included developing a script-based search strategy and search process, writing evaluation criteria, and conducting a narrative description and evaluation of the selected apps.

resultsUseful search terms were identified, which included nonclinical, aspirational, and problem-based phrases. There were 39 apps selected for inclusion in the review. No apps specifically targeted women with anxiety in pregnancy. Of the 39 apps included in the review, 33 (85%) focused solely on mind-body techniques to promote relaxation, stress reduction, and psychological well-being. Only 8 of the 39 (21%) apps included in the review reported that health care professionals had contributed to app development and only 1/39 (3%) provided empirical evidence on the effectiveness and acceptability of the app. The top 12/39 (31%) apps were evaluated by 2 independent reviewers using the developed criteria and scores. There was a small negative correlation between the reviewers' scores and app user rating scores, with higher user rating scores associated with lower reviewer scores.

conclusionsApp developers, publishers, and maternity care professionals should seek advice from women with lived experience of anxiety symptoms in pregnancy to locate, promote, and optimize the visibility of apps for pregnant women. There is a lack of resources that provide coping strategies based on current evidence for the treatment of anxiety in pregnancy. Maternity care providers are limited in their ability to locate and recommend acceptable and trustworthy apps because of the lack of information on the evidence base, development, and testing of apps. Maternity care professionals and women need access to libraries of trusted apps that have been evaluated against relevant and established criteria.

Indexed as

Maternal Health ServicesMobile ApplicationsObstetricsAnxietyAnxiety DisordersFemaleHumansPregnancyantenatalanxietydigital interventionsevaluationmaternitymHealthmobile appmobile applicationspregnancypsychological well-beingquality assessment

Identifiers

PMID35319482
PMCPMC8987965
OpenAlexW4205573380

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.