Britt Lunde1, Rachel Perry2, Aparna Sridhar3, Katherine T Chen4. 1. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Science, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York. Electronic address: britt.lunde@mssm.edu. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California, Irvine, Orange, California. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California. 4. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Science, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Patients use mobile applications (apps) to obtain information about health, including contraception. Providers and health educators may also use apps designed for patients to aid in patient education during the clinical encounter or recommend apps for patient use. Individuals may have a difficult time remaining updated on the number and quality of available apps. The objective of this study is to identify and evaluate contraception apps for patient education and health promotion, so that providers and health educators may recommend accurate apps to patients. METHODS: We systematically searched the Apple iTunes Store using contraception search terms. A master list of apps was created and the apps were divided into categories and subcategories according to intended audience and purpose. Contraception apps for patient education and health promotion were selected and also checked for availability in the Google Play Store. We evaluated these identified apps using an adapted APPLICATIONS scoring system. FINDINGS: Forty-eight apps were identified from the original search. Nineteen of these were excluded because they did not open on an iPhone or iPad, were no longer available, or did not contain educational material on contraception. We excluded 11 additional apps that contained inaccurate information. We evaluated 18 apps. The mean score was 10.6 out of 17 possible points with a range of 7 to 15 points. CONCLUSIONS: Many apps provide contraception information for patients, but some apps are inaccurate. Few apps provide comprehensive information on all available methods, including effectiveness, side effects, and contraindications.
PURPOSE:Patients use mobile applications (apps) to obtain information about health, including contraception. Providers and health educators may also use apps designed for patients to aid in patient education during the clinical encounter or recommend apps for patient use. Individuals may have a difficult time remaining updated on the number and quality of available apps. The objective of this study is to identify and evaluate contraception apps for patient education and health promotion, so that providers and health educators may recommend accurate apps to patients. METHODS: We systematically searched the Apple iTunes Store using contraception search terms. A master list of apps was created and the apps were divided into categories and subcategories according to intended audience and purpose. Contraception apps for patient education and health promotion were selected and also checked for availability in the Google Play Store. We evaluated these identified apps using an adapted APPLICATIONS scoring system. FINDINGS: Forty-eight apps were identified from the original search. Nineteen of these were excluded because they did not open on an iPhone or iPad, were no longer available, or did not contain educational material on contraception. We excluded 11 additional apps that contained inaccurate information. We evaluated 18 apps. The mean score was 10.6 out of 17 possible points with a range of 7 to 15 points. CONCLUSIONS: Many apps provide contraception information for patients, but some apps are inaccurate. Few apps provide comprehensive information on all available methods, including effectiveness, side effects, and contraindications.
Authors: Robinah Nalwanga; Elly Nuwamanya; Afra Nuwasiima; Janet U Babigumira; Francis T Asiimwe; Joseph B Babigumira Journal: Reprod Health Date: 2021-05-17 Impact factor: 3.223
Authors: Michael Brown; Edward McCann; Maria Truesdale; Mark Linden; Lynne Marsh Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-10-18 Impact factor: 3.390