Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42429296›Full record

SynthesisJMIR mHealth and uHealth2026

Safer Sleep Guidance in Standalone UK Smartphone Apps for Parents of Newborns and Infants: Systematic mHealth App Review.

Senna Yousef, Niamh Meaney, Dawn Dowding, Norina Gasteiger

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Senna YousefDivision of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Manchester, England, United Kingdom.ORCID 0009-0006-6493-0372
Niamh MeaneyDivision of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Manchester, England, United Kingdom.ORCID 0009-0009-2880-8523
Dawn DowdingDivision of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Manchester, England, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5672-8605
Norina GasteigerDivision of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Manchester, England, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7801-7417

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundParents are increasingly using smartphone apps to help guide decision-making around aspects of caregiving, including safer sleep. However, it remains unclear whether the guidance provided aligns with best practice guidelines.

objectiveThis review aimed to identify smartphone apps that provide safer sleep guidance and to assess their content, technical features, functionality, and quality. A secondary aim was to make recommendations on the improvements that existing and future apps can make to provide safer sleep guidance.

methodsIn January 2026, we searched the UK Google Play Store and Apple App Store for safer sleep guidance apps for parents and caregivers of newborns and infants (babies aged ≤12 months). Information regarding content, technical features, and functional features was extracted and summarized descriptively. Each app was evaluated by 2 raters using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) and the IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics functionality score. Adherence to best practice sleep guidance was assessed using bespoke criteria. Interrater reliability was calculated.

resultsA total of 1345 apps were identified, with 12 meeting the inclusion criteria. All were free to download, with 42% (5/12) containing in-app purchases. Only 17% (2/12) were affiliated with a professional health, medical, clinical, or government body. All 12 apps contained some information regarding safer sleep practices, although this was addressed and named differently (eg, calling it cot death, sudden infant death syndrome, or safe sleep). Of the 9 criteria relating to safer sleep best practice guidance, the apps mentioned an average of 6.75 (SD 1.71; range 3-9) criteria. Some promoted unsafe sleep practices (ie, around swaddling and cosleeping). The apps included an average of 5.4 of the 11 IMS functionality criteria (SD 2.5; range 2-9). The mean MARS score was 3.7 out of 5 (SD 0.43; range 2.92-4.13), and most (11/12, 92%) had a minimum acceptability score of 3 or above. Two had been formally trialed or tested. Although the language used was considered accessible (easy to understand), none of the apps allowed the language to be changed (beyond English), and very few (3/12, 25%) enabled users to change to night/dark mode, which would be considered essential when using these apps at night.

conclusionsSeveral apps about safer baby sleep exist. Few discuss safer sleep guidance comprehensively or raise awareness about sudden infant death syndrome and its links with unsafe sleep. All the reviewed apps met the minimum acceptability criteria for quality; however, not many were formally trialed or tested. More long-term research should be conducted on the effectiveness of safer sleep apps on adherence to safer sleep guidance. We recommend that apps relating to infant and baby safety in general include information on realistic safer sleep practices that are informed by best practice guidelines and take a risk minimization approach.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsParentsSleepHumansInfantInfant, NewbornTelemedicineUnited Kingdombabiesdigital healthguidanceinfantsmHealthmobile healthnewbornreviewsafer sleep

Identifiers

PMID42429296
PMCPMC13401075

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.