Vahid Garousi1,2, David Cutting1, Michael Felderer3,4. 1. Queen's University Belfast, UK. 2. Bahar Software Engineering Consulting Corporation, UK. 3. University of Innsbruck, Austria. 4. Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden.
Abstract
CONTEXT: More than 78 countries have developed COVID contact-tracing apps to limit the spread of coronavirus. However, many experts and scientists cast doubt on the effectiveness of those apps. For each app, a large number of reviews have been entered by end-users in app stores. OBJECTIVE: Our goal is to gain insights into the user reviews of those apps, and to find out the main problems that users have reported. Our focus is to assess the "software in society" aspects of the apps, based on user reviews. METHOD: We selected nine European national apps for our analysis and used a commercial app-review analytics tool to extract and mine the user reviews. For all the apps combined, our dataset includes 39,425 user reviews. RESULTS: Results show that users are generally dissatisfied with the nine apps under study, except the Scottish ("Protect Scotland") app. Some of the major issues that users have complained about are high battery drainage and doubts on whether apps are really working. CONCLUSION: Our results show that more work is needed by the stakeholders behind the apps (e.g., app developers, decision-makers, public health experts) to improve the public adoption, software quality and public perception of these apps.
CONTEXT: More than 78 countries have developed COVID contact-tracing apps to limit the spread of coronavirus. However, many experts and scientists cast doubt on the effectiveness of those apps. For each app, a large number of reviews have been entered by end-users in app stores. OBJECTIVE: Our goal is to gain insights into the user reviews of those apps, and to find out the main problems that users have reported. Our focus is to assess the "software in society" aspects of the apps, based on user reviews. METHOD: We selected nine European national apps for our analysis and used a commercial app-review analytics tool to extract and mine the user reviews. For all the apps combined, our dataset includes 39,425 user reviews. RESULTS: Results show that users are generally dissatisfied with the nine apps under study, except the Scottish ("Protect Scotland") app. Some of the major issues that users have complained about are high battery drainage and doubts on whether apps are really working. CONCLUSION: Our results show that more work is needed by the stakeholders behind the apps (e.g., app developers, decision-makers, public health experts) to improve the public adoption, software quality and public perception of these apps.
Authors: Jobie Budd; Benjamin S Miller; Erin M Manning; Vasileios Lampos; Mengdie Zhuang; Michael Edelstein; Geraint Rees; Vincent C Emery; Molly M Stevens; Neil Keegan; Michael J Short; Deenan Pillay; Ed Manley; Ingemar J Cox; David Heymann; Anne M Johnson; Rachel A McKendry Journal: Nat Med Date: 2020-08-07 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Jilian A Sacks; Elizabeth Zehe; Cindil Redick; Alhoussaine Bah; Kai Cowger; Mamady Camara; Aboubacar Diallo; Abdel Nasser Iro Gigo; Ranu S Dhillon; Anne Liu Journal: Glob Health Sci Pract Date: 2015-11-12
Authors: Lisa O Danquah; Nadia Hasham; Matthew MacFarlane; Fatu E Conteh; Fatoma Momoh; Andrew A Tedesco; Amara Jambai; David A Ross; Helen A Weiss Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2019-09-18 Impact factor: 3.090
Authors: Adi Alsyouf; Abdalwali Lutfi; Mohammad Al-Bsheish; Mu'taman Jarrar; Khalid Al-Mugheed; Mohammed Amin Almaiah; Fahad Nasser Alhazmi; Ra'ed Masa'deh; Rami J Anshasi; Abdallah Ashour Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-06-14 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Golden Gao; Raynell Lang; Robert J Oxoby; Mehdi Mourali; Hasan Sheikh; Madison M Fullerton; Theresa Tang; Braden J Manns; Deborah A Marshall; Jia Hu; Jamie L Benham Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-07-15 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Laszlo Horvath; Susan Banducci; Joshua Blamire; Cathrine Degnen; Oliver James; Andrew Jones; Daniel Stevens; Katharine Tyler Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-01-17 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Erica L Dixon; Sukanya M Joshi; William Ferrell; Kevin G Volpp; Raina M Merchant; Sharath Chandra Guntuku Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-09-09 Impact factor: 3.752