ArticleJMIR medical education2025
Reviewing Mobile Apps for Teaching Human Anatomy: Search and Quality Evaluation Study.
Article in JMIR medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perspectives of Premedical Students at a Medical University College in Malaysia Regarding Augmented Reality Integration in Anatomy Education: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Content Analysis of Human Anatomy Mobile Apps for Undergraduate Student Learning using MARuL.Medical science educator · 2026Article
- From the dissection hall to the digital frontier: A comprehensive review of innovations in anatomical pedagogy and their impact on health literacy and promotion.Journal of education and health promotion · 2026Review
- Smart Osteology: An AI-Powered Two-Stage System for Multi-Species Long Bone Detection and Classification Using YOLOv5 and CNN Architectures for Veterinary Anatomy Education and Forensic Applications.Veterinary sciences · 2025Article
- Translation and validation of the traditional Chinese Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS-TW) for evaluating mHealth apps.mHealth · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMobile apps designed for teaching human anatomy offer a flexible, interactive, and personalized learning platform, enriching the educational experience for both students and health care professionals.
objectiveThis study aimed to conduct a systematic review of the human anatomy mobile apps available on Google Play, evaluate their quality, highlight the highest scoring apps, and determine the relationship between objective quality ratings and subjective star ratings.
methodsThe Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) was used to evaluate the apps. The intraclass correlation coefficient was calculated using a consistency-type 2-factor random model to measure the reliability of the evaluations made by the experts. In addition, Pearson correlations were used to analyze the relationship between MARS quality scores and subjective evaluations of MARS quality item 23.
resultsThe mobile apps with the highest overall quality scores according to the MARS (ie, sections A, B, C, and D) were Organos internos 3D (anatomía) (version 4.34), Sistema óseo en 3D (Anatomía) (version 4.32), and VOKA Anatomy Pro (version 4.29). To measure the reliability of the MARS quality evaluations (sections A, B, C, and D), the intraclass correlation coefficient was used, and the result was "excellent." Finally, Pearson correlation results revealed a significant relationship (r=0.989; P<.001) between the quality assessments conducted by health care professionals and the subjective evaluations of item 23.
conclusionsThe average evaluation results of the selected apps indicated a "good" level of quality, and those with the highest ratings could be recommended. However, the lack of scientific backing for these technological tools is evident. It is crucial that research centers and higher education institutions commit to the active development of new mobile health apps, ensuring their accessibility and validation for the general public.
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.