Dataset Information

User Engagement and Usability of Suicide Prevention Apps: Systematic Search in App Stores and Content Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

People with suicidal thoughts are more inclined to seek technology-delivered interventions than in-person forms of treatment, making mobile apps for suicide prevention an ideal platform for treatment delivery. This review examines apps designed for suicide prevention, with a specific focus on user engagement.

Objective

This study aims to update the literature and broadly evaluate the landscape of mobile health apps for suicide prevention; examine apps with key features and primary approaches to suicide prevention; and systematically evaluate the engagement, functionality, aesthetics, and information of the apps.

Methods

All apps related to suicidal thoughts and behaviors were identified in the Google Play and iOS app stores and were systematically reviewed for their content and quality. The mobile app rating scale (MARS) was used to evaluate app usability and engagement.

Results

Of the 66 apps identified, 42 (64%) were specifically designed for people with suicidal ideation, and 59 (89%) had at least one best practice feature for suicide risk reduction. The mean overall MARS score of all apps was 3.5 (range 2.1-4.5), with 83% (55/66) of apps having a minimum acceptability score of 3. The total MARS score was not associated with the user app rating (r=-0.001; P=.99) or the number of features (r=0.24; P=.09).

Conclusions

This study identified many usable and engaging apps in app stores designed for suicide prevention. However, there are only limited apps for clinicians. Thus, mobile apps for suicide prevention should be carefully developed and clinically evaluated.

SUBMITTER: Wilks CR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8319780 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPhysical inactivity is a major contributor to the development and persistence of chronic diseases. Mobile health apps that foster physical activity have the potential to assist in behavior change. However, the quality of the mobile health apps available in app stores is hard to assess for making informed decisions by end users and health care providers.ObjectiveThis study aimed at systematically reviewing and analyzing the content and quality of physical activity apps available in the 2 major app stores (Google Play and App Store) by using the German version of the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS-G). Moreover, the privacy and security measures were assessed.MethodsA web crawler was used to systematically search for apps promoting physical activity in the Google Play store and App Store. Two independent raters used the MARS-G to assess app quality. Further, app characteristics, content and functions, and privacy and security measures were assessed. The correlation between user star ratings and MARS was calculated. Exploratory regression analysis was conducted to determine relevant predictors for the overall quality of physical activity apps.ResultsOf the 2231 identified apps, 312 met the inclusion criteria. The results indicated that the overall quality was moderate (mean 3.60 [SD 0.59], range 1-4.75). The scores of the subscales, that is, information (mean 3.24 [SD 0.56], range 1.17-4.4), engagement (mean 3.19 [SD 0.82], range 1.2-5), aesthetics (mean 3.65 [SD 0.79], range 1-5), and functionality (mean 4.35 [SD 0.58], range 1.88-5) were obtained. An efficacy study could not be identified for any of the included apps. The features of data security and privacy were mainly not applied. Average user ratings showed significant small correlations with the MARS ratings (r=0.22, 95% CI 0.08-0.35; P<.001). The amount of content and number of functions were predictive of the overall quality of these physical activity apps, whereas app store and price were not.ConclusionsApps for physical activity showed a broad range of quality ratings, with moderate overall quality ratings. Given the present privacy, security, and evidence concerns inherent to most rated apps, their medical use is questionable. There is a need for open-source databases of expert quality ratings to foster informed health care decisions by users and health care providers.

Project description:BackgroundThe number of mobile health (mHealth) apps released for musculoskeletal (MSK) injury treatment and self-management with home exercise programs (HEPs) has risen rapidly in recent years as digital health interventions are explored and researched in more detail. As this number grows, it is becoming increasingly difficult for users to navigate the market and select the most appropriate app for their use case. It is also unclear what features the developers of these apps are harnessing to support patient self-management and how they fit into clinical care pathways.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to scope the current market of mHealth apps for MSK rehabilitation and to report on their features, claims, evidence base, and functionalities.MethodsA cross-sectional study of apps for MSK rehabilitation was performed across the iTunes App Store and Google Play Store. Four search terms were used, namely, physiotherapy rehabilitation, physical therapy rehabilitation, rehabilitation exercise, and therapeutic exercise to identify apps, which were then cross-referenced against set selection criteria by 4 reviewers. Each reviewer, where possible, downloaded the app and accessed supplementary literature available on the product to assist in data extraction.ResultsA total of 1322 apps were identified. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria and removing duplicates, 144 apps were included in the study. Over half (n=81, 56.3%) of the included apps had been released within the past 3 years. Three quarters (n=107, 74.3%) of the apps made no reference to evidence supporting the design or efficacy of the app, with only 11.1% (n=16) providing direct citations to research. Most of the apps did utilize exercise pictures (n=138, 95.8%) or videos (n=97, 67.4%); however, comparatively few harnessed additional features to encourage engagement and support self-management, such as an adherence log (n=66, 45.8%), communication portal (n=32, 22.2%), patient-reported outcome capture (n=36, 25%), or direct feedback (n=57, 39.6%). Of note and concern, many of these apps prescribed generic exercises (n=93, 64.6%) in the absence of individualized input to the user, with few providing specific patient education (n=43, 34%) and safety advice or disclaimers (n=38, 26.4%).ConclusionsThe cohort of apps included in this study contained a large heterogeneity of features, so it is difficult for users to identify the most appropriate or effective app. Many apps are missing the opportunity to offer key features that could promote exercise adherence and encourage self-management in MSK rehabilitation. Furthermore, very few developers currently offering products on the market are providing evidence to support the design and efficacy of their technologies.

Project description:BackgroundUsing a mobile app for self-management could make it easier for patients to get insight into their blood pressure patterns. However, little is known about the availability, quality, and features of mobile apps targeting blood pressure.ObjectiveThe goal of the research was to determine the availability, functionality, and quality of mobile apps that could be used for blood pressure monitoring purposes.MethodsA systematic app search was performed based on the standards for systematic reviews. We searched the Dutch official app stores for Android and iOS platforms using predefined keywords and included all English and Dutch mobile apps targeting blood pressure. Two independent assessors determined eligibility and quality of the apps using the 5-point Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS). Quality scores of the apps with and without 17 a priori selected characteristics were compared using independent sample t tests.ResultsA total of 184 apps (104 Android, 80 iOS) met the inclusion criteria. The mean overall MARS score was 2.63 (95% CI 2.55-2.71) for Android and 2.64 (95% CI 2.56-2.71) for iOS. The apps Bloeddruk (4.1) and AMICOMED BP (3.6) had the highest quality scores on the Android and iOS platforms, respectively. Of the app characteristics recorded, only pricing, in-app advertisements, and local data storage were not associated with the quality scores. In only 3.8% (7/184) of the apps, involvement of medical experts in its development was mentioned, whereas none of the apps was formally evaluated with results published in a peer-reviewed journal.ConclusionsThis study provides an overview of the best apps currently available in the app stores and important key features for self-management that can be used by health care providers and patients with hypertension to identify a suitable app targeting blood pressure monitoring. However, the majority of the apps targeting blood pressure monitoring were of poor quality. Therefore, it is important to involve medical experts in the developmental stage of health-related mobile apps to improve the quality of these apps.

Project description:BackgroundThe wide use of mobile health apps has created new possibilities in social anxiety education and treatment. However, the content and quality of social anxiety apps have been quite unclear, which makes it difficult for people to choose appropriate apps to use on smartphones and tablets.ObjectiveThis study aims to identify the psychoeducational social anxiety apps in the two most popular Australian app stores, report the descriptive and technical information provided in apps exclusively for social anxiety, evaluate app quality, and identify whether any apps would be appropriate for people with social anxiety or others who know someone with social anxiety.MethodsThis systematic stepwise app search was guided by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) standards and entailed searching for, identifying, and selecting apps in the Australian Apple App and Google Play Stores; downloading, using, and reviewing the identified apps; reporting technical and descriptive information in the app stores, an online app warehouse, and individual apps; evaluating app quality; and deciding whether to recommend the use of the apps.ResultsIn the app stores, 1043 apps were identified that contained the keywords social anxiety, social phobia, or shyness in their names or descriptions. Of these, 1.15% (12/1043) were evaluated (3 iOS apps and 9 Android apps). At the time of evaluation, the apps were compatible with smartphones and tablet devices; 9 were free to download from the app stores, whereas 3 were priced between US $2.95 (Aus $3.99) and US $3.69 (Aus $5.00). Among the evaluated apps, 3 were intended for treatment purposes, 3 provided supportive resources, 1 was intended for self-assessment, and the remaining 5 were designed for multiple purposes. At the time of downloading, app store ratings were available for 5 apps. The overall app quality was acceptable according to the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS). On the basis of the MARS app quality rating subscale (sections A-D), the apps functioned well in performance, ease of use, navigation, and gestural design. However, app quality was less favorable when rated using the MARS app subjective quality subscale (section E).ConclusionsThe psychoeducational social anxiety apps evaluated in our study may benefit people with social anxiety, health professionals, and other community members. However, given that none of the apps appeared to contain empirical information or were shown to clinically reduce social anxiety (or aid in managing social anxiety), we cannot recommend their use. App accessibility could be improved by developing apps that are free and available for a wider range of operating systems, both between and within countries and regions. Information communication and technology professionals should collaborate with academics, mental health clinicians, and end users (ie, co-design) to develop current, evidence-based apps.

Project description:BackgroundWomen consult information in mobile apps (apps) during pregnancy, and even obstetrics specialists highlight that pregnancy is the ideal moment for the use of apps as consultation sources. However, the high number of apps designed for pregnancy requires a careful assessment to determine their suitability before recommendation.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to identify the apps available in Spanish that can be recommended based on their content, behavior change techniques (BCTs), and quality as a complementary tool during pregnancy.MethodsA systematic search on app stores to identify apps was performed in the Apple App Store and Google Play with the subject term "pregnancy." The apps meeting the following criteria were chosen: pregnancy-related content, free, and available in Spanish. An app was excluded if it was classified as a game or entertainment and thus lacking an educational or health aim and if it did not target the population under study. The selected apps were downloaded, and their quality was assessed using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS), with the BCTs included evaluated using the BCT taxonomy version 1 and its content.ResultsA total of 457 apps were identified, 25 of which were downloaded for assessment (5.6%). The median for objective and subjective quality was 2.94 (IQR 2.71-3.46) and 1.75 (IQR 1.25-2.25), respectively. Regarding content, the median of topics included in the apps was 23 (IQR 16-23), with weight gain, nutrition, fetal development, and physical activity being the most common. The median number of BCTs was 12 (IQR 0.5-3.5). The most frequently identified BCTs in the apps were "Self-Monitoring of Outcomes," followed by "Goal Behavior" and "Instructions." Statistically significant correlations were observed between objective quality and content (ρ=0.624; P=.001), subjective quality and content (ρ=0.638; P=.001), objective quality and BCTs (ρ=0.672; P<.001), subjective quality and BCTs (ρ=0.623; P<.001), and BCTs and content (ρ=0.580; P=.002).ConclusionsThe results of this study suggest that only a small percentage of free pregnancy apps available in Spanish should be recommended. The apps with the best MARS scores were those that addressed a higher number of topics and included a higher number of BCTs. Those with the best content and quality, and a higher number of BCTs included could be recommended by health professionals.

Project description:BackgroundGlobally, 3.7 million people die of sudden cardiac death annually. Following the World Health Organization endorsement of the Kids Save Lives statements, initiatives to train school-age children in basic life support (BLS) have been widespread. Mobile phone apps, combined with gamification, represent an opportunity for including mobile learning (m-learning) in teaching schoolchildren BLS as an additional teaching method; however, the quality of these apps is questionable.ObjectiveThis study aims to systematically evaluate the quality, usability, evidence-based content, and gamification features (GFs) of commercially available m-learning apps for teaching guideline-directed BLS knowledge and skills to school-aged children.MethodsWe searched the Google Play Store and Apple iOS App Store using multiple terms (eg, cardiopulmonary resuscitation [CPR] or BLS). Apps meeting the inclusion criteria were evaluated by 15 emergency health care professionals using the user version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale and System Usability Scale. We modified a five-finger mnemonic for teaching schoolchildren BLS and reviewed the apps' BLS content using standardized criteria based on three CPR guidelines. GFs in the apps were evaluated using a gamification taxonomy.ResultsOf the 1207 potentially relevant apps, only 6 (0.49%) met the inclusion criteria. Most apps were excluded because the content was not related to teaching schoolchildren BLS. The mean total scores for the user version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale and System Usability Scale score were 3.2/5 points (95% CI 3.0-3.4) and 47.1/100 points (95% CI 42.1-52.1), respectively. Half of the apps taught hands-only CPR, whereas the other half also included ventilation. All the apps indicated when to start chest compressions, and only 1 app taught BLS using an automated external defibrillator. Gamification was well integrated into the m-learning apps for teaching schoolchildren BLS, whereas the personal and fictional, educational, and performance gamification groups represented most GFs.ConclusionsImproving the quality and usability of BLS content in apps and combining them with GFs can offer educators novel m-learning tools to teach schoolchildren BLS skills.

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:BackgroundWith the rapid development of mobile health (mHealth) technology, many health apps have been introduced to the commercial market for people with back pain conditions. However, little is known about their content, quality, approaches to care for low back pain (LBP), and associated risks of use.ObjectiveThe aims of this research were to (1) identify apps for the self-management of LBP currently on the market and (2) assess their quality, intervention content, theoretical approaches, and risk-related approaches.MethodsThe UK iTunes and Google Play stores were initially searched for apps related to the self-management of LBP in May 2022. A repeat search in June 2023 was conducted to ensure that any relevant new apps developed in the last year were incorporated into the review. A total of 3 keywords recommended by the Cochrane Back and Neck Group were used to search apps "low back pain," "back pain," and "lumbago." The quality of the apps was assessed by using the 5-point Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS).ResultsA total of 69 apps (25 iOS and 44 Android) met the inclusion criteria. These LBP self-management apps mainly provide recommendations on muscle stretching (n=51, 73.9%), muscle strengthening (n=42, 60.9%), core stability exercises (n=32, 46.4%), yoga (n=19, 27.5%), and information about LBP mechanisms (n=17, 24.6%). Most interventions (n=14, 78%) are consistent with the recommendations in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines. The mean (SD) MARS overall score of included apps was 2.4 (0.44) out of a possible 5 points. The functionality dimension was associated with the highest score (3.0), whereas the engagement and information dimension resulted in the lowest score (2.1). Regarding theoretical and risk-related approaches, 18 (26.1%) of the 69 apps reported the rate of intervention progression, 11 (15.9%) reported safety checks, only 1 (1.4%) reported personalization of care, and none reported the theoretical care model or the age group targeted.ConclusionsmHealth apps are potentially promising alternatives to help people manage their LBP; however, most of the LBP self-management apps were of poor quality and did not report the theoretical approaches to care and their associated risks. Although nearly all apps reviewed included a component of care listed in the NICE guidelines, the model of care delivery or embracement of care principles such as the application of a biopsychosocial model was unclear.