背景:吸烟是可预防死亡的主要原因,确定新的治疗方法来促进戒烟对于改善公共健康至关重要。随着数字健康和移动应用的兴起,这些工具提供了解决戒烟的潜在机会,然而,这些应用程序的功能以及它们是否为戒烟提供科学支持尚不清楚。
目的:这项研究的目的是使用美国精神病学协会应用程序评估模型来评估来自Android和Apple应用程序商店平台的与戒烟相关的顶级应用程序,并调查可用于最终用户的常见应用程序功能。
方法:我们在2021年7月对Android和iOS应用商店进行了搜索,以查找与关键字“吸烟”相关的应用,“烟草”,\"\"烟,\"和\"香烟\"来评估戒烟的应用程序。应用程序进行了相关性筛选,训练有素的评估员识别和分析特征,包括可访问性(即,成本),隐私,临床基础,和应用程序的功能,使用来自美国精神病学协会应用程序评估模型的105个客观问题的系统框架。所有应用程序评级数据都存储在mindapps中,一个可公开访问的数据库,考虑到市场上可用的应用程序的动态特性,该数据库每6个月持续更新一次。我们对2021年7月和2022年11月推出的应用程序进行了表征。
结果:我们最初确定了389个应用程序,由于不相关和无功能,排除了161,评级为228,其中152个可用于Android平台,120个可用于iOS平台。2021年,一些回报率最高的应用程序(71/228,31%)在2022年不再运行。我们对评级应用程序的分析揭示了可访问性和功能的局限性。虽然大多数应用程序(179/228,78%)是免费下载的,超过一半的成本与应用内购买或完全使用相关。不到65%(149/228)的隐私政策解决了应用程序中收集的数据。就干预特征而言,超过56%(128/228)的应用程序允许用户设置和检查目标,超过46%(106/228)的人提供心理教育,尽管很少有应用程序为戒烟提供基于证据的支持,例如同伴支持或技能培训,包括正念和深呼吸,更少的人提供了基于证据的干预措施,如接受和承诺疗法或认知行为疗法。2021年和2022年只有12个应用程序发表了支持戒烟可行性或有效性的研究。
结论:确定了许多戒烟应用程序,但是分析揭示了局限性,包括高比率的不相关和不起作用的应用程序,高周转率,很少有应用程序为戒烟提供循证支持。因此,对消费者来说,识别相关的,基于证据的应用程序在应用程序商店中支持戒烟,心理健康应用程序的综合评估系统至关重要。
Cigarette smoking is a leading cause of preventable death, and identifying novel treatment approaches to promote smoking
cessation is critical for improving public health. With the rise of digital health and mobile apps, these tools offer potential opportunities to address smoking
cessation, yet the functionality of these apps and whether they offer scientifically based support for smoking
cessation are unknown.
The goal of this research was to use the American Psychiatric Association app evaluation model to evaluate the top-returned apps from Android and Apple app store platforms related to smoking cessation and investigate the common app features available for end users.
We conducted a search of both Android and iOS app stores in July 2021 for apps related to the keywords \"smoking,\" \"tobacco,\" \"smoke,\" and \"cigarette\" to evaluate apps for smoking
cessation. Apps were screened for relevance, and trained raters identified and analyzed features, including accessibility (ie, cost), privacy, clinical foundation, and features of the apps, using a systematic framework of 105 objective questions from the American Psychiatric Association app evaluation model. All app rating data were deposited in mindapps, a publicly accessible database that is continuously updated every 6 months given the dynamic nature of apps available in the marketplace. We characterized apps available in July 2021 and November 2022.
We initially identified 389 apps, excluded 161 due to irrelevance and nonfunctioning, and rated 228, including 152 available for Android platforms and 120 available for iOS platforms. Some of the top-returned apps (71/228, 31%) in 2021 were no longer functioning in 2022. Our analysis of rated apps revealed limitations in accessibility and features. While most apps (179/228, 78%) were free to download, over half had costs associated with in-app purchases or full use. Less than 65% (149/228) had a privacy policy addressing the data collected in the app. In terms of intervention features, more than 56% (128/228) of apps allowed the user to set and check in on goals, and more than 46% (106/228) of them provided psychoeducation, although few apps provided evidence-based support for smoking cessation, such as peer support or skill training, including mindfulness and deep breathing, and even fewer provided evidence-based interventions, such as acceptance and commitment therapy or cognitive behavioral therapy. Only 12 apps in 2021 and 11 in 2022 had published studies supporting the feasibility or efficacy for smoking cessation.
Numerous smoking
cessation apps were identified, but analysis revealed limitations, including high rates of irrelevant and nonfunctioning apps, high rates of turnover, and few apps providing evidence-based support for smoking cessation. Thus, it may be challenging for consumers to identify relevant, evidence-based apps to support smoking cessation in the app store, and a comprehensive evaluation system of mental health apps is critically important.