ArticleJMIR human factors2025
Self-Determined Health App Evaluation Questionnaire Development: Mixed Methods Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The rapid increase in the number of health apps and their volatility in Austrian pp stores for Android and Apple are signs of a flourishing business sector in the wellness industry. Objective: In this report, a questionnaire for informed decision-making by users was developed and evaluated using health apps in the categories "Nutrition", "Exercise", "Mental Health" and "Symptom Checker". Methods: Evaluation criteria were derived from multiple reference documents and weighted in a survey, as well as a focus group meeting. Further, the selected evaluation criteria were tested against selected apps, which were most popular in the above-mentioned categories in fall 2023. Results: The short questionnaire is to be made publicly available to citizens and covers the categories of the quality of the app provider (regulatory compliance, safety, and quality assurance), the content quality of the app (functionality and evidence-based content), and the user-friendliness of the app. It consists of 6 question items, which appeared to be problematic in the evaluation most often. For ease of use, a short questionnaire with the most critical questions and helpful tips from the evaluation was expanded by the question of importance and with meaningful advice on how to find the right information in an app. Conclusions: The evaluation based on the comprehensive questionnaire using selected apps confirmed the importance of such a questionnaire since most of the apps lacked basic properties in terms of safety and security.
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.