Cited by 65Digital Mental Health InterventionsMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsHealth, Technology, Consumer Behavior

Assessing mental health apps marketplaces with objective metrics from 29,190 data points from 278 apps

Lagan, Sarah, D'Mello, Ryan, Vaidyam, Aditya, Bilden, Rebecca, Torous, John·2021·Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica

Abstract

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.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/acps.13306

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lagan, S., D'Mello, R., Vaidyam, A., Bilden, R., & Torous, J.
Affiliations
  • Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
  • Department of Psychiatry Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Harvard Medical School Boston MA USA
Corresponding author
Torous, John
Venue
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-04-29
Volume
144
Issue
2
Pages
201-210
ISSN
  • 0001-690X (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0447
OpenAlex
W3141253249
Cited by
65
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 4
FWCI
10.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Argosy Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Health, Technology, Consumer Behavior
Keywords
mental health apps, privacy and security, app updates, app features, user engagement, interoperability, Android and iOS apps, app selection
MeSH terms
Humans, Mental Health, Benchmarking, Mobile Applications

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review