Vivian Kwan1, Nicoline Bihelek, Vicki Anderson, Keith Yeates. 1. University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada (Mss Kwan and Bihelek and Dr Yeates); and University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia (Dr Anderson).
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To map the number and type of smartphone applications available for persons with traumatic brain injury (TBI), evaluate validity of app content, and investigate evidence for any claims made. METHODS: We searched iTunes and Google Play and also completed a web search. The purpose of each app and any claims were extracted, and a search for best available evidence was performed. RESULTS: Seventy apps met our inclusion criteria (35 related to assessment, 11 to education, 9 to treatment/management, 8 to impact sensors, and 7 to symptom tracking). To the best of our knowledge, no empirical research has been published to demonstrate that the use of any particular TBI-related app leads to clinically meaningful benefits compared with not using the app. Other problems include potential biases in self-report leading to possible app misuse, lack of references for app content, and inappropriate marketing to laypersons not trained to interpret the findings of tools validated for use by healthcare professionals. CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence for benefit from using TBI-related apps is minimal. More collaborative research is needed among clinicians, scientists, and app developers to determine whether, and how, apps may be helpful to individuals at risk for or following TBI.
OBJECTIVES: To map the number and type of smartphone applications available for persons with traumatic brain injury (TBI), evaluate validity of app content, and investigate evidence for any claims made. METHODS: We searched iTunes and Google Play and also completed a web search. The purpose of each app and any claims were extracted, and a search for best available evidence was performed. RESULTS: Seventy apps met our inclusion criteria (35 related to assessment, 11 to education, 9 to treatment/management, 8 to impact sensors, and 7 to symptom tracking). To the best of our knowledge, no empirical research has been published to demonstrate that the use of any particular TBI-related app leads to clinically meaningful benefits compared with not using the app. Other problems include potential biases in self-report leading to possible app misuse, lack of references for app content, and inappropriate marketing to laypersons not trained to interpret the findings of tools validated for use by healthcare professionals. CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence for benefit from using TBI-related apps is minimal. More collaborative research is needed among clinicians, scientists, and app developers to determine whether, and how, apps may be helpful to individuals at risk for or following TBI.
Authors: Shannon B Juengst; Lauren Terhorst; Andrew Nabasny; Tracey Wallace; Jennifer A Weaver; Candice L Osborne; Suzanne Perea Burns; Brittany Wright; Pey-Shan Wen; Chung-Lin Novelle Kew; John Morris Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-02-23 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Cathriona Clarke; Vicki Anderson; Franz E Babl; Vanessa C Rausa; Gavin A Davis; Peter Barnett; Ali Crichton; Michael Takagi; Stephen J C Hearps; Katie Davies; Audrey McKinlay; Nicholas Anderson; Vivian Kwan; Sanji Kanagalingam; Gabi Ceregra; Anita Petris; Simone Darling; Patrick Clifton; Peter Harcourt Journal: Ann Transl Med Date: 2020-05