OBJECTIVE: Utilizing a standard framework that may help clinicians and patients to identify relevant mental health apps, we sought to gain a comprehensive picture of the space by searching for, downloading, and reviewing 278 mental health apps from both the iOS and Android stores. METHODS: 278 mental health apps from the Apple iOS store and Google Play store were downloaded and reviewed in a standardized manner by trained app raters using a validated framework. Apps were evaluated with this framework comprising 105 questions and covering app origin and accessibility, privacy and security, inputs and outputs, clinical foundation, features and engagement style, and interoperability. RESULTS: Our results confirm that app stars and downloads-even for the most popular apps by these metrics-did not correlate with more clinically relevant metrics related to privacy/security, effectiveness, and engagement. Most mental health apps offer similar functionality, with 16.5% offering both mood tracking and journaling and 7% offering psychoeducation, deep breathing, mindfulness, journaling, and mood tracking. Only 36.4% of apps were updated with a 100-day window, and 7.5% of apps had not been updated in four years. CONCLUSION: Current app marketplace metrics commonly used to evaluate apps do not offer an accurate representation of individual apps or a comprehensive overview of the entire space. The majority of apps overlap in terms of features offered, with many domains and other features not well represented. Selecting an appropriate app continues to require personal matching given no clear trends or guidance offered by quantitative metrics alone.
OBJECTIVE: Utilizing a standard framework that may help clinicians and patients to identify relevant mental health apps, we sought to gain a comprehensive picture of the space by searching for, downloading, and reviewing 278 mental health apps from both the iOS and Android stores. METHODS: 278 mental health apps from the Apple iOS store and Google Play store were downloaded and reviewed in a standardized manner by trained app raters using a validated framework. Apps were evaluated with this framework comprising 105 questions and covering app origin and accessibility, privacy and security, inputs and outputs, clinical foundation, features and engagement style, and interoperability. RESULTS: Our results confirm that app stars and downloads-even for the most popular apps by these metrics-did not correlate with more clinically relevant metrics related to privacy/security, effectiveness, and engagement. Most mental health apps offer similar functionality, with 16.5% offering both mood tracking and journaling and 7% offering psychoeducation, deep breathing, mindfulness, journaling, and mood tracking. Only 36.4% of apps were updated with a 100-day window, and 7.5% of apps had not been updated in four years. CONCLUSION: Current app marketplace metrics commonly used to evaluate apps do not offer an accurate representation of individual apps or a comprehensive overview of the entire space. The majority of apps overlap in terms of features offered, with many domains and other features not well represented. Selecting an appropriate app continues to require personal matching given no clear trends or guidance offered by quantitative metrics alone.
Authors: Carl B Roth; Andreas Papassotiropoulos; Annette B Brühl; Undine E Lang; Christian G Huber Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-08-05 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Emma Morton; Jennifer Nicholas; Linda Yang; Laura Lapadat; Steven J Barnes; Martin D Provencher; Colin Depp; Michelle Chan; Rhea Kulur; Erin E Michalak Journal: Int J Bipolar Disord Date: 2022-04-04
Authors: Georgie Hudson; Esther Negbenose; Martha Neary; Sonja M Jansli; Stephen M Schueller; Til Wykes; Sagar Jilka Journal: JMIR Form Res Date: 2022-09-23