Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42815018›Full record

Observational studyJMIR formative research2026

Use of mHealth Apps by General and Family Medicine Physicians in Portugal: Observational Cross-Sectional Quantitative Study.

Érica Taveira, Inês Dutra, Sílvia Rêgo

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in JMIR formative research, 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

3 authors.

Érica TaveiraFaculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Alameda Professor Hernâni Monteiro, Porto, 4200-319, Portugal, 351 22 040 2000.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-6721-3682
Inês DutraFaculty of Sciences, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3578-7769
Sílvia RêgoFaculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Alameda Professor Hernâni Monteiro, Porto, 4200-319, Portugal, 351 22 040 2000.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2852-1994

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The digitalization of health care has accelerated the adoption of mobile health (mHealth) apps in general and family medicine in Portugal. These tools may support chronic disease management and clinical decision-making. However, limited high-quality scientific evidence and the absence of a national framework for certification and quality standards create uncertainty about their safe integration into clinical practice. Objective: This study aimed to characterize mHealth app use among general and family medicine residents and physicians in Portugal. It also examined factors influencing app selection, barriers to adoption, and clinicians' perceptions regarding the integration of AI into clinical practice. Methods: An observational, cross-sectional, quantitative study was conducted using an online survey developed with LimeSurvey. The survey was distributed to residents and physicians registered with the Results: The final sample included 141 participants (n=104, 73.8% female; n=37, 26.2% male). Most clinicians were aware of mHealth apps (138/141, 97.9%), and 85.1% (120/141) reported using them in clinical practice. Among 120 users, 87.5% (n=105) regularly used 2 to 5 apps. A total of 69 unique apps were identified; the 13 most cited accounted for 77.4% (246/318) of all mentions, including Tonic, UpToDate, Cardio4all, and PEM Móvel. Apps were mainly used during clinical consultations (111/120, 92.5%). The most frequent factors influencing app choice were ease of use (114/120, 95.0%) and evidence-based clinical effectiveness (79/120, 65.8%). Reported barriers included lack of knowledge about available apps (117/139, 84.2%) and the absence of national evaluation standards (66/139, 47.5%). Among nonusers (n=21), the main structural barrier was poor integration with clinical information systems (n=15, 71.4%). Regarding AI, 56.0% (79/141) reported awareness of AI-integrated apps, mainly Tonic and ChatGPT. The same proportion considered AI use beneficial, especially for clinical decision support (114/141, 80.9%) and administrative automation (88/141, 62.4%). Key concerns included ethics, data security, and privacy (105/141, 74.5%) and limited interoperability (94/141, 66.7%). Conclusions: mHealth app adoption in Portugal is high but fragmented and largely driven by personal initiative (98/218, 45.0%) and informal recommendations, with limited institutional guidance. Tonic was the only app identified by respondents as reporting compliance with ISO 13485 (medical software quality), ISO/IEC 42001 (AI management systems), and UEMS-EACCME clinical accreditation. Most clinicians perceive national regulatory guidance as insufficient (73/139, 52.5%). Future progress requires the urgent development of a national framework for the curation and recommendation of mHealth apps aligned with international assessment frameworks such as DiGA (

Indexed as

Family PracticeMobile ApplicationsTelemedicineAdultCross-Sectional StudiesDigital HealthFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPortugalSurveys and Questionnairesdigital health adoptiongeneral and family medicinemHealthmHealth appsmobile health

Identifiers

PMID42815018
PMCPMC13626549

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.