Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39633263›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2024

Developing and validating a content quality evaluation tool for cancer mobile applications.

Najmeh Ashkani, Leila Erfannia, Rita Rezaee, Behrouz Alizadeh Savareh, Azadeh Bashiri

Abstract readValidation Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Najmeh AshkaniDepartment of Health Information Management, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Student Research Committee, Health Human Resources Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Leila ErfanniaDepartment of Health Information Management, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Health Human Resources Research Center, Clinical Education Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Rita RezaeeDepartment of Health Information Management, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Health Human Resources Research Center, Clinical Education Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Behrouz Alizadeh SavarehPhD in Medical Informatics, Research and Development Manager, Department of Artificial Intelligence, Naaptech Co, Tehran, Iran.
Azadeh BashiriDepartment of Health Information Management, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Health Human Resources Research Center, Clinical Education Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran. Bashiri.azadeh@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCancer remains a leading cause of death, underscoring the importance of reliable health apps. This study aims to design and validate a content quality evaluation tool for cancer mobile applications ensuring they provide standard services and features to users.

methodThis descriptive-analytical study was conducted in steps including identifying mobile application contents, designing and validating evaluation tool. Studies published until February 19, 2023, in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Scientific Information Database (SID) databases, as well as mobile applications in Myket, Bazaar, and Google Play, were searched. Data extraction and expert panel validation followed, leading to four expert sessions to design the tool. Nineteen oncologists, health information management and medical informatics specialties were included in the study as a research community. The tool's face validity, content validity and reliability were assessed using CVR (Content Validity Ratio), CVI (Content Validity Index), and Cronbach's alpha respectively.

resultsOut of 242 initial search results in databases and 125 mobile applications in app stores, 25 articles and 20 mobile applications included based on the search limits. The designed tools consist of 8 main themes (prevention, diagnosis, treatment, follow-up, education, communication, requests/order and other) with 43 question items. All items received scores above 0.79 in CVI and 0.42 in CVR, leading to their approval and the reliability of the tool was accepted with a score of 0.967.

conclusionEvaluating cancer mobile applications can be very helpful in developing useful and supportive mobile apps, and assist health policymakers in identifying and recommending high-quality cancer-related apps. This will enable patients to choose the most suitable apps, enhancing the quality of cancer care.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsNeoplasmsHumansReproducibility of ResultsTelemedicineCancerEvaluationMobile applicationsMobile health

Identifiers

PMID39633263
PMCPMC11619331

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.