• español
    • English
  • Login
  • English 
    • español
    • English

UniversidaddeCádiz

Área de Biblioteca, Archivo y Publicaciones
Communities and Collections
View Item 
  •   RODIN Home
  • Producción Científica
  • Artículos Científicos
  • View Item
  •   RODIN Home
  • Producción Científica
  • Artículos Científicos
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Measuring the quality of mobile applications for the management of pain: a standardised review using the mobile app rating scale (MARS)

Thumbnail
Identificadores

URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10498/20835

DOI: 10.2196/10718

ISSN: 2291-5222

Files
jmir-chronicpain.pdf (601.6Kb)
Statistics
View statistics
Metrics and citations
 
Share
Export
Export reference to MendeleyRefworksEndNoteBibTexRIS
Metadata
Show full item record
Author/s
Salazar Couso, AlejandroAuthority UCA; Sola Perea, Helena deAuthority UCA; Failde Martínez, InmaculadaAuthority UCA; Moral Muñoz, José AntonioAuthority UCA
Date
2018-10-25
Department
Enfermería y Fisioterapia
Source
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2018 , vol. 6 n. 10
Abstract
Background: Chronic pain is a major health issue requiring an approach that not only considers medication, but also many other factors included in the Bio-Psycho-Social model of pain. New technologies, such as mobile applications, are tools to address these factors, although in many cases they lack proven quality or are not based on scientific evidence, so it is necessary to review and measure their quality. Objective: The aim is to review and measure the quality of mobile applications for the management of pain using the mobile app rating scale (MARS). Methods: This review included 18 pain related mobile apps from App Store and Android Market. The MARS was administered to measure their quality. We list the scores (of each section and the final score) of every app and we report the mean score (and standard deviation) for an overall vision of the quality of the pain related apps. We compare the section scores between the groups defined according to the tertiles via ANOVA analyses, after checking for normality (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test). Results: The global quality ranged from 1.74 (worst app) to 4.35 (best app). The 18 apps, as a whole, obtained an average score of 3.17 (SD=0.75). The best rated sections were “Functionality” (Mean=3.92;SD=0.72), “Aesthetics” (Mean=3.3;SD=1.05), and “Engagement” (Mean=2.87;SD=1.14), while the worst rated were “App specific” (Mean=2.48;SD=1), “Information” (Mean=2.52;SD=0.82), and “App subjective quality” (Mean=2.68;SD=1.22). The main differences between tertiles were found on “app subjective quality”, “Engagement”, “Aesthetics”, and “App specific”. Conclusions: Current pain related apps are of a certain quality, mainly regarding their technical aspects, although they fail to offer information and have an impact on the user. Most apps are not based on scientific evidence, have not been rigorously tested, and the confidentiality of the information collected is not guaranteed. Future apps would need to improve these aspects and exploit the capabilities of current devices.
Collections
  • Artículos Científicos [11777]
  • Articulos Científicos Enf. Fisio. [320]
  • Artículos Científicos INIBICA [1083]

Browse

All of RODINCommunities and CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

My Account

LoginRegister

Statistics

View Usage Statistics

Información adicional

AboutDeposit in RODINPoliciesGuidelinesRightsLinksStatisticsNewsFrequently Asked Questions

RODIN is available through

OpenAIREOAIsterRecolectaHispanaEuropeanaBaseDARTOATDGoogle Academic

Related links

Sherpa/RomeoDulcineaROAROpenDOARCreative CommonsORCID

RODIN está gestionado por el Área de Biblioteca, Archivo y Publicaciones de la Universidad de Cádiz

Contact informationSuggestionsUser Support