JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

The global burden of disease attributes 20% of deaths to poor nutrition. Although hundreds of nutrition-related mobile applications have been created to help improve this situation and these have been downloaded by millions of users, the effectiveness of integrating these technologies on the adoption of healthy eating remains mixed. Similarly, no significant evaluation of nutrition applications in French, spoken by approximately 300 million people, has yet been identified in the literature.

Objective:

The aim of this study is to review which nutrition mobile apps are currently available on the French market, and to carry out an exhaustive assessment of their quality using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) tool.

Methods:

A screening of apps related to nutritional health was conducted from March 10 to 17, 2021, on the Google Play Store and the French App Store. A shortlist of 15 apps was identified and assessed using the French version of MARS. Eight dietitian nutritionists assigned to assess seven apps. Remaining apps were randomly allocated to ensure four ratings per app. Intraclass correlation was used to evaluate inter-rater agreement. Mean ± SD scores and their distributions for each section and item were calculated.

Results:

The top scores for quality were obtained by Yazio (mean 3.84 ± standard deviation 0.32), FeelEat (3.71 ± 0.47) and BonneApp (3.65 ± 0.09). The engagement scores (Section A) ranged from 1.95 ± 0.5 for iEatBetter to 3.85 ± 0.44 for Feeleat. The functionality scores (Section B) ranged from 2.25 ± 0.54 for Naor to 4.25 ± 0.46 for Yazio. The Aesthetics scores (Section C) ranged from 2.17 ± 0.34 for Naor to 3.88 ± 0.47 for Yazio. The information scores (Section D) ranged from 2.38 ± 0.60 for iEatBetter:Journal alimentaire to 3.73 ± 0.29 for Yazio. The MARS subjective quality (Section E) varied from 1.13 ± 0.26 for Naor and 1.13 ± 0.25 iEatBetter:Journal alimentaire to 2.28 ± 0.88 for Compteur de calories Fatsecret. The specificity of apps varied from 1.38 ± 0.64 for iEatBetter:Journal alimentaire to 3.50 ± 0.91 for Feeleat. The app-specific score was always lower than the subjective quality score that was always lower than the quality score and that was lower than the rating score from the iOS or Android app stores.

Conclusions:

Although the prevention and information messages regarding nutritional habits are not scientifically verified before marketing, dieteticians-nutritionists evaluated that the apps quality was quite relevant. The subjective quality and mobile app specificities were associated with lower ratings. Further investigations are needed to assess their alignment with recommendations and their long-term impact on users.