Abstract：
To identify and evaluate the quality of mobile apps available in Brazil focused on the care of patients with anxiety disorders.
A comprehensive search was conducted until October 2021 on Play Store (Android) and Apple Store (iOS) in Brazil, using the terms \"anxiety,\" \"phobia,\" \"panic attack,\" and \"social phobia.\" Two independent authors identified the apps and performed data extraction and quality assessment using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS). Pearson\'s correlation was used to analyze the relationship between user star rating and the quality defined by the MARS instrument.
A total of 3,278 potential apps were identified, of which 71 fully met the eligibility criteria. Most apps were made available on the Play Store (91.74%), in English (69.01%), and updated in the last two years (90.14%). Approximately half of the apps (50.70%) did not inform the developer\'s country and most of them did not report the user star rating (70.42%). The target population was indicated as free by most apps (85.92%), with generalized anxiety disorder being the most addressed disorder (74.65%), followed by panic disorder (33.80%). The three main purposes of the apps were education (83.10%), self-assessment (38.03%), and meditation/breathing (32.39%). Only 31 apps (43.66%) had acceptable quality (above 3.0) and the average total MARS quality score of 2.93 (2.20 to 3.90), with the functionality section receiving the highest score (3.90) and the lowest scoring sections being engagement (2.16). The apps that were rated stars by users (29.58%) showed a negative Pearson correlation (ρ = -0.100), evidencing a difference in the user\'s evaluation and that performed using the MARS instrument.
Gaps in the quality of apps focused on the care of patients with anxiety disorders were evidenced since most were classified as having low quality through the MARS instrument. Thus, users are recommended to use these apps with caution.
A comprehensive search was conducted until October 2021 on Play Store (Android) and Apple Store (iOS) in Brazil, using the terms \"anxiety,\" \"phobia,\" \"panic attack,\" and \"social phobia.\" Two independent authors identified the apps and performed data extraction and quality assessment using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS). Pearson\'s correlation was used to analyze the relationship between user star rating and the quality defined by the MARS instrument.
A total of 3,278 potential apps were identified, of which 71 fully met the eligibility criteria. Most apps were made available on the Play Store (91.74%), in English (69.01%), and updated in the last two years (90.14%). Approximately half of the apps (50.70%) did not inform the developer\'s country and most of them did not report the user star rating (70.42%). The target population was indicated as free by most apps (85.92%), with generalized anxiety disorder being the most addressed disorder (74.65%), followed by panic disorder (33.80%). The three main purposes of the apps were education (83.10%), self-assessment (38.03%), and meditation/breathing (32.39%). Only 31 apps (43.66%) had acceptable quality (above 3.0) and the average total MARS quality score of 2.93 (2.20 to 3.90), with the functionality section receiving the highest score (3.90) and the lowest scoring sections being engagement (2.16). The apps that were rated stars by users (29.58%) showed a negative Pearson correlation (ρ = -0.100), evidencing a difference in the user\'s evaluation and that performed using the MARS instrument.
Gaps in the quality of apps focused on the care of patients with anxiety disorders were evidenced since most were classified as having low quality through the MARS instrument. Thus, users are recommended to use these apps with caution.
摘要：
目的：确定和评估巴西针对焦虑症患者护理的移动应用程序的质量。
方法：在巴西的Play商店（Android）和AppleStore（iOS）上进行了全面搜索，直到2021年10月，使用“焦虑”一词，\"\"恐惧症,\"\"恐慌发作,“和”社交恐惧症。两位独立作者确定了这些应用程序，并使用移动应用程序评定量表(MARS)进行了数据提取和质量评估。使用Pearson相关性分析用户星级评分与MARS仪器定义的质量之间的关系。
结果：总共确定了3,278个潜在应用程序，其中71人完全符合资格标准。大多数应用程序都可以在Play商店上使用（91.74％），英语（69.01%），并在过去两年更新（90.14%）。大约一半的应用程序（50.70％）没有通知开发者所在的国家，其中大多数没有报告用户星级（70.42％）。大多数应用程序（85.92％）表示目标人群免费，广泛性焦虑症是最受关注的疾病(74.65%)，其次是恐慌症(33.80%)。应用程序的三个主要目的是教育（83.10％），自我评估(38.03%)，和冥想/呼吸（32.39%）。只有31个应用程序（43.66％）具有可接受的质量（高于3.0）和平均总MARS质量得分为2.93（2.20至3.90），功能部分获得最高分（3.90），得分最低的部分是参与度（2.16）。被用户评为星级的应用程序（29.58％）显示出负Pearson相关性（ρ=-0.100），证明用户的评估和使用MARS仪器进行的评估存在差异。
结论：有证据表明，专注于焦虑症患者护理的应用程序质量存在差距，因为大多数应用程序通过MARS仪器被归类为低质量。因此，建议用户谨慎使用这些应用。
方法：在巴西的Play商店（Android）和AppleStore（iOS）上进行了全面搜索，直到2021年10月，使用“焦虑”一词，\"\"恐惧症,\"\"恐慌发作,“和”社交恐惧症。两位独立作者确定了这些应用程序，并使用移动应用程序评定量表(MARS)进行了数据提取和质量评估。使用Pearson相关性分析用户星级评分与MARS仪器定义的质量之间的关系。
结果：总共确定了3,278个潜在应用程序，其中71人完全符合资格标准。大多数应用程序都可以在Play商店上使用（91.74％），英语（69.01%），并在过去两年更新（90.14%）。大约一半的应用程序（50.70％）没有通知开发者所在的国家，其中大多数没有报告用户星级（70.42％）。大多数应用程序（85.92％）表示目标人群免费，广泛性焦虑症是最受关注的疾病(74.65%)，其次是恐慌症(33.80%)。应用程序的三个主要目的是教育（83.10％），自我评估(38.03%)，和冥想/呼吸（32.39%）。只有31个应用程序（43.66％）具有可接受的质量（高于3.0）和平均总MARS质量得分为2.93（2.20至3.90），功能部分获得最高分（3.90），得分最低的部分是参与度（2.16）。被用户评为星级的应用程序（29.58％）显示出负Pearson相关性（ρ=-0.100），证明用户的评估和使用MARS仪器进行的评估存在差异。
结论：有证据表明，专注于焦虑症患者护理的应用程序质量存在差距，因为大多数应用程序通过MARS仪器被归类为低质量。因此，建议用户谨慎使用这些应用。
