Maintenance Notice

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?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR mHealth and uHealth

Date Submitted: Sep 5, 2024
Date Accepted: Feb 10, 2026

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Mobile App Rating Scale for Health Care Professionals to Assess the Quality of mHealth Apps: Questionnaire Development and Psychometric Analysis

Saparamadu AADNS, Chan YH, Sharpe A

Mobile App Rating Scale for Health Care Professionals to Assess the Quality of mHealth Apps: Questionnaire Development and Psychometric Analysis

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2026;14:e48828

DOI: 10.2196/48828

PMID: 42537209

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Mobile application rating scale for health professionals (pMARS) to assess the quality of mHealth applications: questionnaire development and psychometric analysis

  • Amarasinghe Arachchige Don Nalin Samandika Saparamadu; 
  • Yiong Huak Chan; 
  • Albie Sharpe

ABSTRACT

Background:

Existing tools for evaluating mobile health apps (MHAs) are not well equipped to assess the quality of apps designed for healthcare professionals (HCPs) from their perspectives.

Objective:

Therefore, we developed a new tool based on the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS), named pMARS, and conducted a psychometric analysis of this tool.

Methods:

Phase 1 adapted MARS for use as pMARS. We established the judgment validity of pMARS through face and content validity. It also included a qualitative study conducted among HCPs to understand users’ perspectives. Phase 2 invited HCP participants to complete pMARS based on their experience with the LabMed app. We established construct validity through internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) and structural equation modeling (SEM) to assess the interrelations between various latent constructs. Finally, we employed item response theory (IRT) to evaluate each item’s impact on latent constructs of interest.

Results:

At the end of Phase 1, pMARS had 26 items across five domains: engagement, functionality, aesthetics, information, and subjective quality. Phase 2 analysis (n=218) established good reliability (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.855-0.931). SEM analysis demonstrated that functionality had the strongest influence on end-user willingness to use/recommend and purchase the MHA. IRT identified customization and interactivity of the engagement domain as having a weak impact on latent concepts, whereas entertainment has a higher impact. Ease of use and gestural design had a weak impact on the functionality domain, while arrangement and size of content and quantity and quality had a strong impact on aesthetics and information domains, respectively.

Conclusions:

This study introduces a novel tool, pMARS, for evaluating MHAs designed for HCPs, and is the first to use IRT in MARS or its derivatives. We recommend developing dedicated evaluation tools for HCPs and using IRT in future studies to refine pMARS by removing ineffective items. Clinical Trial: NA


 Citation

Please cite as:

Saparamadu AADNS, Chan YH, Sharpe A

Mobile App Rating Scale for Health Care Professionals to Assess the Quality of mHealth Apps: Questionnaire Development and Psychometric Analysis

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2026;14:e48828

DOI: 10.2196/48828

PMID: 42537209

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.