ReviewOrthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany)2023
[Secure app usage-Evaluation benchmarks for medical apps : Quality aspects for health apps based on 9 key criteria].
Review in Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Smartphones and health apps are an integral part of everyday life. They are increasingly being used for medical purposes. However, there is no fundamental basis or consensus on the evidence on which decisions are made towards a unified digital strategy. Consequently, the understanding of the quality of health apps is only inconsistent and fuzzily defined. The 9 quality criteria presented by the Association of Medical Societies (AWMF)-transparency, appropriateness, risk appropriateness, ethical harmlessness, legal conformity, content validity, technical appropriateness, usability, resource efficiency-serve as a guide for individual and institutionalized quality assessment. The principles are based on a comprehensive compilation of existing (inter-) national standards and evaluation benchmarks. Analogously to usual medical practice, it is also obligatory to conduct one's own research for a suitable app and to weigh up the risks and benefits when using an app.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37347272What 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.