ArticleJMIR pediatrics and parenting2024
mHealth Apps in the Digital Marketplace for Pediatric Patients With Cancer: Systematic Search and Analysis.
Article in JMIR pediatrics and parenting, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of Mobile Health Interventions in Pediatric Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Pooled it
- Development of S-IMCICA_V.2: A User-Centered Educational and Decision-Support mHealth App for Early Detection of Childhood Cancer.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026Article
- Development and pre-testing of a family-centered digital intervention to help families know what to EXPECT from pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia therapy.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Interactive Medication Calendars to Support At-Home Care of Pediatric Patients With ALL.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2026Article
- The use of an augmented reality app to support an exercise intervention for children and young people with cancer: perspectives of users and exercise and healthcare professionals in the FORTEe trial.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The substantial increase in smartphone ownership has led to a rise in mobile health (mHealth) app use. Developing tailored features through mHealth apps creates a pathway to address the health care needs of pediatric patients with cancer and their families who have complex care needs. However, few apps are designed specifically to integrate with pediatric cancer care. Objective: This study reports a systematic search and analysis of mHealth apps available on the Apple App (iOS) and Google Play (Android) stores designed for pediatric cancer through a list of features that serve (1) patients, (2) caregivers, or (3) both audiences. Methods: Following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, we reviewed apps for pediatric patients with cancer and caregivers available as of January 30, 2024. We searched the Apple App and Google Play stores with a list of keyword combinations focusing on pediatric cancer care. The inclusion criteria were (1) specifically apps targeted toward pediatric patients with cancer, their families, or both; (2) available in either app store; and (3) available in English. Apps were assessed using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS). The MARS is a quality assessment for mHealth apps, including components of engagement, functionality, aesthetics, and informational quality (5-point Likert scale items-1: low and 5: high quality). Results: In total, 22 apps were identified and 17 of those apps were available on both platforms. The most popular features (n=12) were resource sharing, symptom tracking, reminders, care team connections, journaling, community support, medication tracking, data visualizations, and appointment tracking. Features and interfaces were designed for caregivers (n=9) more frequently than the patients (n=7) while a subset of apps created options for both users (n=6). A total of 16 apps received positive reviews (mean 4.4, SD 0.59; Min=3.1, Max=5.0). A small subset (n=3) achieved over 5000 downloads; however, the majority (n=15) had fewer than 500. More than half (n=12) of the apps were not available in English. Apps requested access to a range of device functionalities to operate (mean 2.72, SD 3.13; Min=0, Max=10). Out of 22, a total of 17 apps were publicly accessible. The mean MARS scores for the apps ranged from 1.71 (SD 0.75) to 4.33 (SD 0.82). Overall, apps scored high on functionality (mean 3.72, SD 0.54) but low on engagement (mean 3.02, SD 0.93). Conclusions: Our review highlights the promising yet underdeveloped potential of mHealth apps in pediatric oncology care, underscoring the need for more inclusive, comprehensive, and integrative digital health solutions. Future developments should actively involve key stakeholders from the pediatric oncology community, including patients, families, and health care professionals, to ensure the apps meet specific needs while addressing linguistic and cultural barriers.
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.