App chronic disease checklist: Protocol to evaluate mobile apps for chronic disease self-management
MetadataShow full item record
Background: The availability of mobile health apps for self-care continues to increase. While little evidence of their clinical impact has been published, there is general agreement among health authorities and authors that consumers’ use of health apps assist in self-management and potentially clinical decision making. A consumer’s sustained engagement with a health app is dependent on the usability and functionality of the app. While numerous studies have attempted to evaluate health apps, there is a paucity of published methods that adequately recognize client experiences in the academic evaluation of apps for chronic conditions. Objective: This paper reports (1) a protocol to shortlist health apps for academic evaluation, (2) synthesis of a checklist to screen health apps for quality and reliability, and (3) a proposed method to theoretically evaluate usability of health apps, with a view towards identifying one or more apps suitable for clinical assessment. Methods: A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram was developed to guide the selection of the apps to be assessed. The screening checklist was thematically synthesized with reference to recurring constructs in published checklists and related materials for the assessment of health apps. The checklist was evaluated by the authors for face and construct validity. The proposed method for evaluation of health apps required the design of procedures for raters of apps, dummy data entry to test the apps, and analysis of raters’ scores. Results: The PRISMA flow diagram comprises 5 steps: filtering of duplicate apps; eliminating non-English apps; removing apps requiring purchase, filtering apps not updated within the past year; and separation of apps into their core functionality. The screening checklist to evaluate the selected apps was named the App Chronic Disease Checklist, and comprises 4 sections with 6 questions in each section. The validity check verified classification of, and ambiguity in, wording of questions within constructs. The proposed method to evaluate shortlisted and downloaded apps comprises instructions to attempt set-up of a dummy user profile, and dummy data entry to represent in-range and out-of-range clinical measures simulating a range of user behaviors. A minimum score of 80% by consensus (using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient) between raters is proposed to identify apps suitable for clinical trials. onclusions: The flow diagram allows researchers to shortlist health apps that are potentially suitable for formal evaluation. The evaluation checklist enables quantitative comparison of shortlisted apps based on constructs reported in the literature. The use of multiple raters, and comparison of their scores, is proposed to manage inherent subjectivity in assessing user experiences. Initial trial of the combined protocol is planned for apps pertaining to the self-monitoring of asthma; these results will be reported elsewhere.
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
An integrated approach to outcome evaluation : incorporating patient reported outcomes in heart failureChang, Sungwon (2012)Globally individuals and health care systems are facing the burden of chronic illness. The impact of the increasing burden of non-communicable diseases is experienced by individuals and health care systems. Across the ...
Assessing physiotherapists’ communication skills for promoting patient autonomy for self-management: reliability and validity of the communication evaluation in rehabilitation toolMurray, A.; Hall, A.; Williams, G.; McDonough, S.; Ntoumanis, Nikos; Taylor, I.; Jackson, B.; Copsey, B.; Hurley, D.; Matthews, J. (2018)© 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group Purpose: To assess the inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity of the Communication Evaluation in Rehabilitation Tool, which aims to externally assess ...
Meuleners, Lynn (2001)Assessments of quality of life (QOL) for adolescents have received relatively little attention in the literature. Although there is no consensus on the definition of adolescent QOL and what aspects should be measured, it ...