Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37000498›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2023

Smartphone and Mobile App Use Among Physicians in Clinical Practice: Scoping Review.

Mauricette Lee, Abu Bakar Shakran Bin Mahmood, Eng Sing Lee, Helen Elizabeth Smith, Lorainne Tudor Car

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Crowdsourcing care: What general practitioner WhatsApp groups get right … and wrong.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The use of communication applications in orthopaedics: a scoping review.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Mauricette LeeLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0003-3311-2685
Abu Bakar Shakran Bin MahmoodLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0009-0006-5062-2504
Eng Sing LeeFamily Medicine and Primary Care, Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0003-4963-535X
Helen Elizabeth SmithFamily Medicine and Primary Care, Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0003-1883-6124
Lorainne Tudor CarLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-8414-7664

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth care professionals are increasingly using smartphones in clinical care. Smartphone use can affect patient quality of care and clinical outcomes.

objectiveThis scoping review aimed to describe how physicians use smartphones and mobile apps in clinical settings.

methodsWe conducted a scoping review using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and reported the results according to PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. We used the following databases in our literature search: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and gray literature for studies published since 2010. An additional search was also performed by scanning the reference lists of included studies. A narrative synthesis approach was used.

resultsA total of 10 studies, published between 2016 and 2021, were included in this review. Of these studies, 8 used surveys and 2 used surveys with focus group study designs to explore smartphone use, its adoption, experience of using it, and views on the use of smartphones among physicians. There were studies with only general practitioners (n=3), studies with only specialists (n=3), and studies with both general practitioners and specialists (n=4). Physicians use smartphones and mobile apps for communication (n=9), clinical decision-making (n=7), drug compendium (n=7), medical education and training (n=7), maintaining health records (n=4), managing time (n=4), and monitoring patients (n=2) in clinical practice. The Medscape medical app was frequently used for information gathering. WhatsApp, a nonmedical app, was commonly used for physician-patient communication. The commonly reported barriers were lack of regulatory oversight, privacy concerns, and limited Wi-Fi or internet access. The commonly reported facilitator was convenience and having access to evidence-based medicine, clinical decision-making support, and a wide array of apps.

conclusionsSmartphones and mobile apps were used for communication, medical education and training, clinical decision-making, and drug compendia in most studies. Although the benefits of smartphones and mobile apps for physicians at work were promising, there were concerns about patient privacy and confidentiality. Legislation is urgently needed to protect the liability of health care professionals using smartphones.

Indexed as

General PractitionersMobile ApplicationsCommunicationHumansSmartphoneSurveys and Questionnairesclinical careconsultantsevidence-based medicinegeneral practitionersGPmobile appsmobile phonepediatriciansprimary care physiciansspecialistsurgeons

Identifiers

PMID37000498
PMCPMC10131676

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.