ArticleBMC public health2025
Health apps: a cross-sectional study exploring patient motivations and usage implications.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mindfulness on the Palm of Your Hand: A Systematic Review of Mobile Mindfulness Apps and Their Effects on Well-Being, Compassion, and Aggression in Non-Clinical Adults.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Digital Health Engagement Regarding Lumbar Disc Herniation in Terms of Exercise Adherence: Integrating Variable-Centered and Person-Centered Perspectives.Patient preference and adherence · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the growing availability of health apps, adoption rates remains limited. The motivations behind their use and their impact on patient's empowerment and patient-Healthcare Professional (HCP) relationships remain unclear, yet understanding these factors is crucial for improving adoption, implementation, and sustained use. This study explores these motivations and user experiences, with a focus on empowerment and interactions with HCPs.
methodsAn online survey among patient panel members of Amsterdam University Medical Center was conducted. Logistic regression adjusted for socio-demographic variables was used to investigate the motivations potentially influencing health app usage. Patient's empowerment and patient-HCP interaction were addressed through descriptive statistics.
resultsAmong 133 patients (39.8% female; average age 67.2 ± 9.8 years), 46% used health apps. Movement and Sport (63.9% of users), Vital Functions (47.5%), and Sleep (36.1%) were the most commonly used types. Users considered access to health data more important (OR = 2.7, p = 0.02), and were more certain about the usefulness of health apps (OR = 0.26, p = 0.01). Non-users were motivated for adoption if the app provides health information (43.1%), access to health data (36.1%), and symptom tracking (27.8%). 60% of the users discussed app-related outcomes with HCPs. Health apps enhanced patients' empowerment by allowing them to maintain an overview of health and supporting active participation in treatment decisions. They also helped gather information before consultations and improved understanding during visits with their HCPs.
conclusionsHealth apps usage appears to be positively associated with the perceived importance of health data and confidence in usefulness of health apps. Non-users are more likely to adopt health apps if they provide insights into their health, enable earlier access to personal health data, and help in symptom tracking. HCPs should actively engage individuals who do not use health apps in conversations that emphasize the relevance of such tools to patient care outcomes. Future research should support HCPS in developing implementation strategies, to engage non-users and to encourage health app integration in healthcare practice.
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.