ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2025
Investigating the Quality of Mobile Apps for Drug-Drug Interaction Management Using the Mobile App Rating Scale and K-Means Clustering: Systematic Search of App Stores.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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: Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) pose a significant risk to patient safety and increase health care costs. Mobile apps offer potential solutions for managing DDIs, yet their quality and effectiveness from the user's perspective remain unclear. Objective: The aim is to evaluate the quality of publicly available mobile apps for DDI management in the US using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) and to identify patterns that reflect user satisfaction and preferences. Methods: A structured review was conducted to identify mobile apps for DDI management, resulting in 19 eligible apps. Two health care-affiliated evaluators independently assessed each app using the mobile app rating scale (MARS). Dimensionality scores were calculated, and correlation analysis was conducted to examine relationships among dimensions. K-means clustering was applied to group apps based on their MARS scores. Scatter plots visualized app distributions across clusters. To validate the clustering model and assess alignment with user satisfaction, mean weighted user ratings were compared with mean MARS scores per cluster. Correlation analysis was also performed between individual MARS dimensions and user ratings within each cluster. Results: The mean MARS score was 3.54 out of 5, with the Information dimension scoring the highest (mean 3.68, SD 0.51) and Engagement the lowest (mean 3.42, SD 0.80). The Kruskal-Wallis test revealed no significant differences in median scores across the four dimensions (χ²3=2.109, P=.55). All MARS dimensions were positively correlated (r=0.65 to 0.92), indicating interrelated quality characteristics. K-means clustering identified three app groups with varying quality profiles: Cluster 1 (n=7, mean MARS=2.86), Cluster 2 (n=7, mean=3.57), and Cluster 3 (n=5, mean=4.44). Cluster 1 apps showed strongest correlations between user satisfaction and functionality (r=0.74) and engagement (r=0.53). Cluster 2 users prioritized information (r=0.41) and aesthetics (r=0.58), and Cluster 3 exhibited balanced influence from information (r=0.62), aesthetics (r=0.58), and functionality (r=0.39). Scatter plots indicated that engagement, functionality, and aesthetics were key drivers of user perception, while information, though consistently strong, played a lesser role in differentiating the apps. The weighted user ratings aligned with MARS scores, supporting the validity of the clustering model. Conclusions: This study assesses the quality of mobile apps for DDI management by integrating MARS with K-means Clustering. This approach enabled a structured classification of apps based on the MARS scores, identifying distinct clusters that reflect overall app quality profiles across key usability dimensions. The study revealed that the influence of MARS dimensions on app ratings varies by cluster, highlighting that the significance of these dimensions shifts according to the specific needs and preferences of different user groups.
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.