ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2025
Users' Needs for Mental Health Apps: Quality Evaluation Using the User Version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale.
Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Emerging Roles of AI in Self-Directed Stress Management: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Mobile App Rating Scale for Health Care Professionals to Assess the Quality of mHealth Apps: Questionnaire Development and Psychometric Analysis.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Wellby, a Cocreated Mobile App and Wearable to Support Stress Management and Overall Well-Being: Mixed Methods Acceptability and Usability Study.JMIR human factors · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Mental health is an essential element of life. However, existing mental health services face challenges in utilization due to issues such as societal prejudices and a shortage of counselors. Mobile health is gaining attention as an alternative approach to improving mental health by addressing the shortcomings of traditional services. As a result, various mental health apps are being developed, but there is a lack of evaluation research on whether these apps meet users' needs. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the content and quality of mental health apps from the user's perspective and identify the content features that influence evaluation scores. We also aim to guide future updates and improvements in mental health apps to deliver high-quality solutions to users. Methods: We searched the Google Play Store and iOS App Store using Korean keywords "mental health," "mental health care," "depression," and "stress." Apps meeting the following criteria were selected for the study: relevance to the topic, written in Korean, more than 700 reviews (Android) or more than 200 reviews (iOS), updated within the past 365 days, available for free, nonduplicate, and currently operational. After identifying and defining the primary contents of the apps, 7 users evaluated their quality using the user version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale (uMARS). Correlation analysis was performed to examine the relationships among app content, uMARS scores, star ratings, and the number of reviews. Multiple regression analysis was conducted to identify the factors influencing uMARS scores and each evaluation item. Results: The analysis included a total of 41 mental health apps. Content analysis revealed that reminders (n=29, 71%), recording and statistics features (n=29, 71%), and diaries (n=24, 59%) were the most common app components. The top-rated apps, as determined by uMARS evaluations, consistently provided information about counselors and counseling agencies, and included counseling services. uMARS scores were significantly correlated with the presence of health care provider information (r=0.53; P<.001) and counseling/question and answer services (r=0.55; P<.001). Multiple regression analysis indicated that providing more relevant information was associated with higher uMARS scores (β=.361; P=.02). Conclusions: The quality of mental health apps was evaluated from the user's perspective using a validated scale. To deliver a high-quality mental health app, it is essential to incorporate app technologies such as generative artificial intelligence during development and to continuously monitor app quality from the user's perspective.
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.