ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2024
Establishing an Evaluation Indicator System for User Satisfaction With Hypertension Management Apps: Combining User-Generated Content and Analytic Hierarchy Process.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating function availability and user satisfaction with nutrition apps: user-generated content analysis and text mining study.Nutrition journal · 2026Article
- Exploring Self-Management-Based Mobile Health User Typologies and Associations Between User Types and Satisfaction With Key Mobile Health Functions: Comparative Study of Various Fitness and Weight Management App User Types.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Development of an Evaluation Index System for Health Recommender Systems Based on the Health Technology Assessment Framework: Cross-Sectional Delphi Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Approved trends and product characteristics of digital therapeutics in four countries.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHypertension management apps (HMAs) can be effective in controlling blood pressure, but their actual impact is often suboptimal. Establishing a user satisfaction evaluation indicator system for HMAs can assist app developers in enhancing app design and functionality, while also helping users identify apps that best meet their needs. This approach aims to improve the overall effectiveness of app usage.
objectiveThis study aims to systematically collect data on HMAs and their user reviews in the United States and China. It analyzes app usage patterns and functional characteristics, identifies factors influencing user satisfaction from existing research, and develops a satisfaction evaluation indicator system to provide more accurate recommendations for improving user satisfaction.
methodsWe conducted a descriptive statistical analysis to assess the development status of HMAs in both countries and applied the task-technology fit model to evaluate whether the app functionalities align with business needs. We separately summarized the factors influencing user satisfaction in both countries from previous research, utilized the analytic hierarchy process to develop an evaluation indicator system for HMA user satisfaction, and calculated satisfaction levels. Based on these findings, we propose improvements to enhance app functionality and user satisfaction.
resultsIn terms of current development status, there were fewer HMAs and user reviews in China compared with the United States. Regarding app functional availability, fewer than 5% (4/91) of the apps achieved a demand fulfillment rate exceeding 80% (8/10). Overall, user satisfaction in both countries was low.
conclusionsIn the United States, user satisfaction was lowest for advertising distribution, data synchronization, and reliability. By contrast, Chinese apps need improvements in cost efficiency and compatibility.
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.