{Reference Type}: Systematic Review
{Title}: Quality assessment of mHealth apps: a scoping review.
{Author}: Giebel GD;Speckemeier C;Schrader NF;Abels C;Plescher F;Hillerich V;Wiedemann D;Börchers K;Wasem J;Blase N;Neusser S;
{Journal}: Front Health Serv
{Volume}: 4
{Issue}: 0
{Year}: 2024
暂无{DOI}: 10.3389/frhs.2024.1372871
{Abstract}: UNASSIGNED: The number of mHealth apps has increased rapidly during recent years. Literature suggests a number of problems and barriers to the adoption of mHealth apps, including issues such as validity, usability, as well as data privacy and security. Continuous quality assessment and assurance systems might help to overcome these barriers. Aim of this scoping review was to collate literature on quality assessment tools and quality assurance systems for mHealth apps, compile the components of the tools, and derive overarching quality dimensions, which are potentially relevant for the continuous quality assessment of mHealth apps.
UNASSIGNED: Literature searches were performed in Medline, EMBASE and PsycInfo. Articles in English or German language were included if they contained information on development, application, or validation of generic concepts of quality assessment or quality assurance of mHealth apps. Screening and extraction were carried out by two researchers independently. Identified quality criteria and aspects were extracted and clustered into quality dimensions.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 70 publications met inclusion criteria. Included publications contain information on five quality assurance systems and further 24 quality assessment tools for mHealth apps. Of these 29 systems/tools, 8 were developed for the assessment of mHealth apps for specific diseases, 16 for assessing mHealth apps for all fields of health and another five are not restricted to health apps. Identified quality criteria and aspects were extracted and grouped into a total of 14 quality dimensions, namely "information and transparency", "validity and (added) value", "(medical) safety", "interoperability and compatibility", "actuality", "engagement", "data privacy and data security", "usability and design", "technology", "organizational aspects", "social aspects", "legal aspects", "equity and equality", and "cost(-effectiveness)".
UNASSIGNED: This scoping review provides a broad overview of existing quality assessment and assurance systems. Many of the tools included cover only a few dimensions and aspects and therefore do not allow for a comprehensive quality assessment or quality assurance. Our findings can contribute to the development of continuous quality assessment and assurance systems for mHealth apps.
UNASSIGNED: https://www.researchprotocols.org/2022/7/e36974/, International Registered Report Identifier, IRRID (DERR1-10.2196/36974).