ArticleBMC public health2022
Country- and app-level factors affecting the adoption and evaluation of COVID-19 mobile apps.
Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Social frailty as a predictor of adverse outcomes among older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2023Pooled it
- A comparison of self-reported COVID-19 symptoms between android and iOS CoronaCheck app users.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Advanced Mobile Communication Techniques in the Fight against the COVID-19 Pandemic Era and Beyond: An Overview of 5G/B5G/6G.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCountries across the globe have released many COVID-19 mobile apps. However, there is a lack of systematic empirical investigation into the factors affecting the adoption and evaluation of COVID-related apps. This study explores what factors at the country level and the app levels would influence the adoption and evaluation of COVID-19 apps.
methodsWe collected data on 267 COVID-19 apps in App Store and Google Play. The number of installs, ratings, reviews and rating scores were used as indicators of adoption and evaluation. Country-level predictors include the number of infected cases and the political system (i.e., democratic vs. non-democratic). App-level predictors include developer (i.e., government vs. non-government) and functions. Four app functions were coded for analysis: providing health information, contact tracing, home monitoring, and consultation. Negative binomial regression and OLS (Ordinary Least Square) regression were used to analyze the data.
resultsOur analyses show that apps developed by countries with more infected cases (B = 0.079, CI (Confidence Interval) = 0.000, 0.158; P = .049) and by non-governmental institutions (B=-0.369, CI=-0.653, -0.083; P = .01) received more positive rating scores. Apps with home monitoring function received lower rating scores (B=-0.550, CI=-0.971, -0.129; P = .01). Regarding adoption, apps developed by governments were more likely to be installed (IRR (Incident Rate Ratio) = 8.156, CI = 3.389, 19.626; P < .001), to be rated (IRR = 26.036, CI = 7.331, 92.468; P < .001), and to receive user comments (IRR = 12.080, CI = 3.954, 37.568; p < .001). Apps with functions of contact tracing or consultation were more likely to be installed (IRR = 4.533, CI = 2.072, 9.918; p < .001; IRR = 4.885, CI = 1.970, 12.111; p < .001), to be rated (IRR = 11.634, CI = 3.486, 38.827; p < .001; IRR = 17.194, CI = 5.309, 55.680; p < .001), and to receive user comments (IRR = 5.688, CI = 2.052, 5.770; p < .001; IRR = 16.718, CI = 5.363, 52.113; p < .001). Apps with home monitoring functions were less likely to be rated (IRR = 0.206, CI = 0.047, 0.896; P = .04) but more likely to receive user comments (IRR = 3.874, CI = 1.044, 14.349; P = .04). Further analysis shows that apps developed in democratic countries (OR (Odd Ratio) = 3.650, CI = 1.238, 10.758; P = .02) or by governments (OR = 7.987, CI = 4.106, 15.534, P < .001) were more likely to include the function of contact tracing.
conclusionThis study systematically investigates factors affecting the adoption and evaluation of COVID-19 apps. Evidence shows that government-developed apps and the inclusion of contact tracing and consultation app functions strongly predict app adoption.
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.