B E O'Donnell1, A K Lewkowitz1, J E Vargas2, M G Zlatnik1. 1. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to evaluate the informative content of two free, pregnancy-specific smartphone applications and their accuracy and adherence to prenatal care guidelines. STUDY DESIGN: This is a qualitative analysis of the information delivered through two free, pregnancy-specific smartphone applications (apps): Text4Baby (T4B) and Baby Center's 'My Pregnancy Today' (BC). All information from conception through 2 weeks postpartum were transcribed and coded independently by two physician researchers. Content was analyzed and assigned thematic codes. The proportion of content each app delivered per theme was then calculated and the χ(2)-test was used to compare thematic frequency between apps. RESULTS: A total of 609 pieces of daily content were transcribed; 698 message themes were coded and analyzed. Most information delivered by T4B was about fetal development (23.8%) or prenatal care (16.6%); most content from BC was about normal pregnancy symptoms (20.1%) or maternal well-being (21.1%); the differences between apps for each of these themes were statistically significant (P<0.05). A total of four messages contained incomplete or ambiguous content; neither app delivered overtly incorrect medical information. T4B and BC had a similar proportion of information that was in-line with the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology Guidelines for Prenatal Care. Neither app delivered any messages about contraception. CONCLUSION: T4B and BC are free, pregnancy-specific apps with different focuses. Neither app delivers comprehensive prenatal information, as evidenced by the absence of information about postpartum contraception. More information is needed to determine the role of such apps in prenatal care.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to evaluate the informative content of two free, pregnancy-specific smartphone applications and their accuracy and adherence to prenatal care guidelines. STUDY DESIGN: This is a qualitative analysis of the information delivered through two free, pregnancy-specific smartphone applications (apps): Text4Baby (T4B) and Baby Center's 'My Pregnancy Today' (BC). All information from conception through 2 weeks postpartum were transcribed and coded independently by two physician researchers. Content was analyzed and assigned thematic codes. The proportion of content each app delivered per theme was then calculated and the χ(2)-test was used to compare thematic frequency between apps. RESULTS: A total of 609 pieces of daily content were transcribed; 698 message themes were coded and analyzed. Most information delivered by T4B was about fetal development (23.8%) or prenatal care (16.6%); most content from BC was about normal pregnancy symptoms (20.1%) or maternal well-being (21.1%); the differences between apps for each of these themes were statistically significant (P<0.05). A total of four messages contained incomplete or ambiguous content; neither app delivered overtly incorrect medical information. T4B and BC had a similar proportion of information that was in-line with the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology Guidelines for Prenatal Care. Neither app delivered any messages about contraception. CONCLUSION: T4B and BC are free, pregnancy-specific apps with different focuses. Neither app delivers comprehensive prenatal information, as evidenced by the absence of information about postpartum contraception. More information is needed to determine the role of such apps in prenatal care.
Authors: Nasser F BinDhim; Ahmed M Shaman; Lyndal Trevena; Mada H Basyouni; Lisa G Pont; Tariq M Alhawassi Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2014-10-17 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Robyn Whittaker; Sabrina Matoff-Stepp; Judy Meehan; Juliette Kendrick; Elizabeth Jordan; Paul Stange; Amanda Cash; Paul Meyer; Julie Baitty; Pamela Johnson; Scott Ratzan; Kyu Rhee Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2012-10-18 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: W Douglas Evans; Jasmine Wallace Bihm; Daniel Szekely; Peter Nielsen; Elizabeth Murray; Lorien Abroms; Jeremy Snider Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2014-05-20 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: William Evans; Peter E Nielsen; Daniel R Szekely; Jasmine W Bihm; Elizabeth A Murray; Jeremy Snider; Lorien C Abroms Journal: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth Date: 2015-01-28 Impact factor: 4.773
Authors: Karen M Goldstein; Leah L Zullig; Eric A Dedert; Amir Alishahi Tabriz; Timothy W Brearly; Giselle Raitz; Suchita Shah Sata; John D Whited; Hayden B Bosworth; Adelaide M Gordon; Avishek Nagi; John W Williams; Jennifer M Gierisch Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-10-03 Impact factor: 6.473