Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.
Who will be affected?
Readers: No access to all 28 journals. We recommend accessing our articles via PubMed Central
Authors: No access to the submission form or your user account.
Reviewers: No access to your user account. Please download manuscripts you are reviewing for offline reading before Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 7:00 PM.
Editors: No access to your user account to assign reviewers or make decisions.
Copyeditors: No access to user account. Please download manuscripts you are copyediting before Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 7:00 PM.
Muro-Culebras A, Escriche-Escuder A, Martin-Martin J, Roldan-Jimenez C, De-Torres I, Ruiz-Muñoz M, Gonzalez-Sanchez M, Mayoral-Cleries F, Biró A, Tang W, Nikolova B, Salvatore A, Cuesta-Vargas AI
Tools for Evaluating the Content, Efficacy, and Usability of Mobile Health Apps According to the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments: Systematic Review
Tools for evaluating the content, efficacy, and usability of mHealth applications: a COSMIN systematic review
Antonio Muro-Culebras;
Adrian Escriche-Escuder;
Jaime Martin-Martin;
Cristina Roldan-Jimenez;
Irene De-Torres;
Maria Ruiz-Muñoz;
Manuel Gonzalez-Sanchez;
Fermin Mayoral-Cleries;
Attila Biró;
Wen Tang;
Borjanka Nikolova;
Alfredo Salvatore;
Antonio Ignacio Cuesta-Vargas
ABSTRACT
Background:
In mobile application stores there are many applications focused on health. And many more appear every day. Unfortunately, few of those applications pass any type of quality control. The only way to assess its quality is the opinion of the users of those applications. This opinion is usually of a very limited and subjective scale. This makes it necessary to use a reliable tool to measure the quality of health applications that reach the user.
Objective:
The present systematic review seeks to psychometrically analyse the tools currently used to measure the quality of mobile health applications. In this way it would be possible to choose the best tool when measuring the quality of said applications.
Methods:
A search was made of tools to measure the quality of mobile applications in the Pubmed database. Studies in which no type of validation was performed were excluded. The measurement tools were analysed following the Cosmin guideline.
Results:
The initial search showed 687 articles. After reading the title and summary, only 48 were selected to make a deeper analysis. Of these, only 15 met the inclusion criteria and were chosen to be analysed in this review. 5 articles were excluded when failing to validate any of the recommended psychometric characteristics. This left a total of 10 articles comprising 8 measurement tools. After the analysis with the COSMIN guideline, 1 tool met 1 criterion of the guide, 2 tools met 3, 3 tools met 4 and 2 tools met 6 criteria of the 10 of the COSMIN guideline. Some of the tools only measure usability, while other tools measure up to 5 dimensions. Only 2 tools have a version for the professional and another version for the user.
Conclusions:
Of the tools analysed, the Health-ITUES scale has the best psychometric validation among the existing tools. However, this tool is very focused on measuring usability. The MARS tool, on the other hand, has a moderate number of validated psychometric characteristics but measures a greater number of dimensions in the health applications. Its use is also widespread.
Citation
Please cite as:
Muro-Culebras A, Escriche-Escuder A, Martin-Martin J, Roldan-Jimenez C, De-Torres I, Ruiz-Muñoz M, Gonzalez-Sanchez M, Mayoral-Cleries F, Biró A, Tang W, Nikolova B, Salvatore A, Cuesta-Vargas AI
Tools for Evaluating the Content, Efficacy, and Usability of Mobile Health Apps According to the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments: Systematic Review