Dataset Information

Comparing Smartphone Apps for Traditional Chinese Medicine and Modern Medicine in China: Systematic Search and Content Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is an integral part of mainstream medicine in China, with theories and practices that are completely different from modern medicine. TCM should not be ignored or confused with modern medicine in the analysis of the Chinese health care system, including the analysis of mobile health (mHealth) apps. To date, differences between TCM apps and modern medicine apps have not be systematically investigated.

Objective

The aim of this study was to systematically compare the quality of apps for TCM and modern medicine in China.

Methods

In December 2020, we searched iOS (iTunes) and Android (Tencent, Oppo, and Huawei app stores) platforms for all mHealth apps and then categorized them as TCM or modern medicine apps if they were included in the final analysis. The included apps were downloaded on smartphones and assessed by 2 reviewers on the following 4 aspects: (1) data in the app stores, including user ratings, download counts, cost, target users, and year of last update; (2) functionality; (3) quality of the app content as determined by the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS); and (4) analysis of the app privacy and security.

Results

In total, 658 apps were analyzed, including 261 TCM medicine apps and 397 modern medicine apps. The average download count of modern medicine apps (approximately 5 million) was more than 10 times that of TCM apps (approximately 400,000). Regarding functionalities, 64.7% (257/397) of modern medicine apps provided telemedicine (74/261, 28.4% in TCM apps), 62.7% (249/397) provided registration (70/261, 26.8% in TCM apps), and 45.6% (181/397) provided communication (38/261, 14.6% in TCM apps). A larger proportion of TCM apps provided prescription and medication management (144/261, 55.2% in TCM apps versus 168/397, 42.3% in modern medicine apps). The majority of modern medicine apps (329/397, 82.9%) combined ≥3 functionalities compared with one-third of TCM apps (93/261, 34.6%). We then selected 81 top apps for quality and safety assessment (41 TCM apps and 40 modern medicine apps). Of these, the mean overall MARS score of TCM apps (2.7, SD 0.5) was significantly lower than modern medicine apps (3.6, SD 0.4). Almost all modern medicine apps (38/40, 95%) addressed privacy and security by providing a privacy policy and describing how to protect personal data, but less than half of the TCM apps (18/41, 44%) described this information (P<.001).

Conclusions

The different functionalities reflect the distinct innate characteristics of these two medical systems. Although great progress has been made and the Chinese mHealth market size is large, there still exist many opportunities for future development, especially for TCM.

SUBMITTER: Liu XH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8108569 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:Traditional, complementary, and alternative medicine (TCAM) has attracted increasing attention in developed countries, but its mainstream status in China, the home of TCAM, is unclear. Over the period of 2004-2016, we analyze the health resources and health resource utilization of traditional medicine in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) hospitals in China. Methods:Over 2004-2016, we obtained data from all TCM hospitals in all Chinese provinces to create a hospital-based, longitudinal dataset. TCM health resources and their utilization were measured by two outcome variables: (1) primary outcome variables comprising the proportion of TCM physicians, TCM pharmacists, revenue from TCM drugs, and TCM prescriptions and (2) the secondary outcome variables, as proxies of westernization for TCM hospitals, comprising the number of medical equipment above RMB 10,000 and the proportion of surgery in inpatient visits. We used linear regression models with hospital-fixed effects to analyze time trends for the outcome variables. Results:The number of public TCM hospitals remained stable from 2004 to 2016, while the number of private TCM hospitals increased from 294 in 2004 to 1560 in 2016. There was a small percentage increase in the proportion of TCM physicians (0.280%), TCM pharmacists (0.298%), and revenue from Chinese medicines (0.331%) and TCM prescriptions (1.613%) per hospital per year. Chinese drugs accounted for less than a half of the total drug prescriptions, and accordingly, just one-third of the drug revenue was from Chinese medicines at TCM hospitals. The proportions of physicians, pharmacists, revenue from Chinese drug sales, and traditional medicine prescriptions never reach the 60% benchmark target for mainstream in TCM hospitals. As proxies for Western medicine practices in TCM hospitals, the number of medical equipment above RMB 10,000 rapidly rose by over 13 percent per hospital per year, but the proportion of inpatient surgeries declined by 0.830 percentage points per hospital per year, reflecting a mixed trend in the use of Western medicine practices. Conclusion:For the 2004-2016 period, traditional medicine, although making progress towards the mainstream benchmark of 60% TCM services, was still not mainstream at TCM hospitals.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Parents use apps to access information on child health, but there are no standards for providing evidence-based advice, support, and information. Well-developed apps that promote appropriate infant feeding and play can support healthy growth and development. A 2015 systematic assessment of smartphone apps in Australia about infant feeding and play found that most apps had minimal information, with poor readability and app quality. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to systematically evaluate the information and quality of smartphone apps providing information on breastfeeding, formula feeding, introducing solids, or infant play for consumers. METHODS:The Google Play store and Apple App Store were searched for free and paid Android and iPhone Operating System (iOS) apps using keywords for infant feeding, breastfeeding, formula feeding, and tummy time. The apps were evaluated between September 2018 and January 2019 for information content based on Australian guidelines, app quality using the 5-point Mobile App Rating Scale, readability, and suitability of health information. RESULTS:A total of 2196 unique apps were found and screened. Overall, 47 apps were evaluated, totaling 59 evaluations for apps across both the Android and iOS platforms. In all, 11 apps had affiliations to universities and health services as app developers, writers, or editors. Furthermore, 33 apps were commercially developed. The information contained within the apps was poor: 64% (38/59) of the evaluations found no or low coverage of information found in the Australian guidelines on infant feeding and activity, and 53% (31/59) of the evaluations found incomplete or incorrect information with regard to the depth of information provided. Subjective app assessment by health care practitioners on whether they would use, purchase, or recommend the app ranged from poor to acceptable (median 2.50). Objective assessment of the apps' engagement, functionality, aesthetics, and information was scored as acceptable (median 3.63). The median readability score for the apps was at the American Grade 8 reading level. The suitability of health information was rated superior or adequate for content, reading demand, layout, and interaction with the readers. CONCLUSIONS:The quality of smartphone apps on infant feeding and activity was moderate based on the objective measurements of engagement, functionality, aesthetics, and information from a reliable source. The overall quality of information on infant feeding and activity was poor, indicated by low coverage of topics and incomplete or partially complete information. The key areas for improvement involved providing evidence-based information consistent with the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council's Infant Feeding Guidelines. Apps supported and developed by health care professionals with adequate health service funding can ensure that parents are provided with credible and reliable resources.

Project description:BackgroundMental health is integral to our salubrity, but mental disorders are very debilitating and common. Therefore, it is critical to provide accessible, timely, and inexpensive mental care. This can be done through mobile health (mHealth), namely, mobile medical apps, which are gaining popularity among clinicians and patients. mHealth is a fast-paced field, and there is significant variation in the number of installs among psychiatry apps. However, the factors that influence psychiatry app installs have yet to be studied.ObjectiveThis study aimed to identify predictors of the number of app installs in psychiatry.MethodsA literature review identified which factors influence app installs. Psychiatry apps available in the Google Play Store were reviewed, and publicly available data were collected. A multivariate ordinal logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of said factors on the number of installs.ResultsOur search identified 128 psychiatry apps: 2.3% (3/128) had never been installed, approximately half (53.1%, 68/128) had less than 500 installs, and only 0.8% (1/128) had over 10,000,000 installs. A multivariate logistic regression analysis identified that apps with a lower price (P<.001), a higher rating (P<.001), optional in-app purchases (P<.001), and age restriction (P=.04) had a higher number of installs. The involvement of a psychiatrist or other health care professional (HCP) had no statistically significant influence on the number of installs. Only data from the Google Play Store and the developers' websites were available for analysis, and the depth of involvement of HCPs was impossible to document.ConclusionsPsychiatry apps with a lower price, optional in-app purchases, age restriction, and a higher rating are expected to have a higher number of installs. Unlike other medical fields, in this study, the explicit participation of psychiatrists in app development was not a significant predictor of the number of installs. Research is needed to identify other factors that may influence the number of installs, as that can help mHealth app development.

Project description:BackgroundKnowledge of the quantity and quality of apps related to coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is lacking. In addition, no directory has been established listing all the apps developed to address the COVID-19 pandemic.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to identify smartphone apps designed to address the COVID-19 pandemic and to analyze their characteristics.MethodsWe performed an observational, cross-sectional, descriptive study of all smartphone apps associated with COVID-19. Between April 27 and May 2, 2020, we searched the App Store (iOS) and Google Play Store (Android) for COVID-19 apps. The search terms used were coronavirus, COVID-19, and SARS-COV-2. The apps were downloaded and evaluated. The variables analyzed were name, platform, country, language, category, cost, update date, size, version, number of downloads, developer, and purpose. Purpose was further classified into the following categories: news, general information, self-diagnosis, contact tracing, notices to contacts, notification of close cases, awareness, helplines, monitoring of clinical parameters, recording of symptoms and treatment, and messaging with health care professionals.ResultsWe identified 114 apps on the investigated platforms. Of these, 62/114 (54.4%) were on Android and 52/114 (45.6%) were on iOS. Of the 114 apps, 37 (32.5%) were developed in Europe, 32 (28.1%) in Asia, and 30 (26.3%) in North America. The most frequent languages were English (65/114, 57.0%), Spanish (34/114, 29.8%), and Chinese (14/114, 12.3%). The most common categories were health and well-being/fitness apps (41/114, 41.2%) and medicine apps (43/114, 37.7%). Of the 114 apps, 113 (99.1%) were free. The mean time between the date of the analysis and the date of the last update was 11.1 days (SD 11.0). Overall, 95 of the 114 apps (83.3%) were intended for the general population, 99 apps (7.9%) were intended for health professionals, and 3 apps (2.6%) were intended for both. Regarding the type of developer, 64/114 apps (56.1%) were developed by governments; 42/114 (64.1%) were developed by national governments, and 23/114 (35.9%) were developed by regional governments. The apps with the highest number of downloads (100,000+) were developed by governments (P=.13), except for the World Health Organization app (500,000+). The purposes of the apps available in Western languages (107/114, 93.9%) were determined; the most common purposes were general information about COVID-19 (66, 64.0%), COVID-19 news (53, 51.0%), recording of symptoms (53, 51.0%), and contact tracing (51, 47.7%). More than one purpose was identified for 99/107 apps (92.5%).ConclusionsThis paper offers a comprehensive and unique review of all available COVID-19 apps. Governments have adopted these tools during the pandemic, and more than half of the apps were developed by government agencies. The most common purposes of the apps are providing information on the numbers of infected, recovered, and deceased patients, recording of symptoms, and contact tracing.

Project description:BackgroundAdherence to medication is estimated to be around 50% for chronically ill patients in high-income countries. Improving the effectiveness of adherence interventions could have a far greater impact on population health than any improvement in specific medical treatments. Mobile health (mHealth) is one of the most effective solutions for helping patients improve their medication intake, notably through the use of mobile apps with reminder systems. With more than 327,000 apps available in the mHealth field, it is difficult for health care professionals and patients alike to choose which apps to recommend and use.ObjectiveWe aim to carry out a systematic search of medication management smartphone apps available in France that send reminders to patients and assess their quality using a validated scale.MethodsMobile apps were identified in October and November 2022 after a systematic keyword search on the 2 main app download platforms: App Store (Apple Inc) and Google Play Store. Inclusion criteria were free availability, date of last update, and availability in French. Next, 2 health care professionals independently evaluated the included apps using the French version of the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS-F), an objective scoring system validated for assessing the overall quality of apps in the mHealth field. An intraclass correlation coefficient was calculated to determine interrater reliability.ResultsIn total, 960 apps were identified and 49 were selected (25 from the App Store and 24 from the Google Play Store). Interrater reliability was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.92; 95% CI 0.87-0.95; P<.001). The average MARS-F score was 3.56 (SD 0.49) for apps on the App Store and 3.51 (SD 0.46) for those on the Google Play Store, with 10 apps scoring above 4 out of 5. Further, 2 apps were tested in at least one randomized controlled trial and showed positive results. The 2 apps with the highest ratings were Mediteo rappel de médicaments (Mediteo GmbH) and TOM rappel medicaments, pilule (Innovation6 GmbH), available on both platforms. Each app's MARS-F score was weakly correlated with user ratings on the App Store and moderately correlated on the Google Play Store.ConclusionsTo our knowledge, this is the first study that used a validated scoring system to evaluate medication management apps that send medication reminders. The quality of the apps was heterogeneous, with only 2 having been studied in a randomized controlled trial with positive results. The evaluation of apps in real-life conditions by patients is necessary to determine their acceptability and effectiveness. Certification of apps is also essential to help health care professionals and patients identify validated apps.