A review of iPhone and Android apps for cancer patients and survivors: assessing their quality, nutrition information and behaviour change techniques
Abstract
Background: The present study reviewed the quality, nutrition content and behaviour change techniques (BCTs) of apps aimed at those with cancer. Methods: The Apple App Store and Androids’ Google Play were searched in March 2020. Apps were scored for accountability as per Silberg’s standards, quality as per the Mobile Application Rating Scale, and BCTs using the CALO‐RE Taxonomy. Nutrition content was summarised and a checklist developed from the European Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ESPEN) cancer and nutrition guidelines and the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) guidelines for Cancer Survivors. Results: Twelve apps were identified, mean (SD) accountability score was 2.7/8 (2.0) (range 0–6) and quality score was 2.9/5 (0.6) (range 1.7–3.7). Overall, 11 BCTs were used (range 0–8 per app). Nutrition content focussed on healthy eating and meeting energy needs. There was a lack of strategies for implementation and no indication of whether the advice was more suited for specific cancer types, stages or treatment. Limited reference was made to recommendations of ESPEN and the WCRF. A strong positive relationship between quality and number of BCTs was found (r = 0.805, n = 9, P = 0.01). Conclusions: Little nutrition information is currently included on publicly available apps aimed at those with a cancer diagnosis.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Two papers assessed the quality of oncology mobile apps for paediatric patients, focussing on medication prompts, and nutritional information and behaviour change.
“Two papers assessed the quality of oncology mobile apps for paediatric patients, focussing on medication prompts [41], and nutritional information and behaviour change [36].”
Both reviewed the CancerAid app, but neither provided real-world data.
“Both reviewed the CancerAid app, but neither provided real-world data.”
Another review on 12 cancer apps reported an average score of 2.9 (range 1.7-3.7).
“another on 12 cancer apps reported an average score of 2.9 (range 1.7-3.7)[36].”
Digital technology is transforming healthcare, and the COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated an increased use of remote care, which has expedited the digital health agenda.
“Digital technology is transforming healthcare, and the COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated an increased use of remote care, which has expedited the digital health agenda [35].”
Cites
Mobile app rating scale: a new tool for assessing the quality of health mobile apps
Stoyanov, S. R., Hides, L., Kavanagh, D. J., Zelenko, O., Tjondronegoro, D., & Mani, M. (2015) · JMIR mHealth and uHealth · doi:10.2196/mhealth.3422 · Cited by 2,233 · see citing works
Dennison, L., Morrison, L., Conway, G., & Yardley, L. (2013) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.2583 · Cited by 895 · see citing works
Michie, S., Wood, C. E., Johnston, M., Abraham, C., Francis, J. J., & Hardeman, W. (2015) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta19990 · Cited by 680 · see citing works
Lyons, E. J., Lewis, Z. H., Mayrsohn, B. G., & Rowland, J. L. (2014) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.3469 · Cited by 547 · see citing works
Apps to promote physical activity among adults: a review and content analysis
Middelweerd, A., Mollee, J. S., van der Wal, C. N., Brug, J., & te Velde, S. J. (2014) · International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity · doi:10.1186/s12966-014-0097-9 · Cited by 546 · see citing works
Bardus, M., van Beurden, S. B., Smith, J. R., & Abraham, C. (2016) · International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity · doi:10.1186/s12966-016-0359-9 · Cited by 350 · see citing works
Bender, J. L., Yue, R. Y. K., To, M. J., Deacken, L., & Jadad, A. R. (2013) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.2661 · Cited by 346 · see citing works
Evidence-Based Strategies in Weight-Loss Mobile Apps
Pagoto, S., Schneider, K., Jojic, M., DeBiasse, M., & Mann, D. (2013) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2013.04.025 · Cited by 325 · see citing works
There’s an App for That: Content Analysis of Paid Health and Fitness Apps
West, J. H., Hall, P. C., Hanson, C. L., Barnes, M. D., Giraud-Carrier, C., & Barrett, J. (2012) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.1977 · Cited by 314 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Vercell, A., Gasteiger, N., Yorke, J., & Dowding, D. (2023) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2022.104931 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
- Authors
- Keaver, L., Loftus, A., & Quinn, L.
- Affiliations
- Institute of Technology Sligo (IE)
- Corresponding author
- Keaver, Laura
- ORCID
- Keaver, Laura
- Venue
- Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2021-01-16
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 572-584
- ISSN
- 0952-3871 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-277X
- OpenAlex
- W3123279458
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 3.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
- Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
- Keywords
- cancer survivors, nutrition information, behaviour change techniques, app quality, accountability, Mobile App Rating Scale, healthy eating, energy demand, mobile health
- MeSH terms
- Diet, Healthy, Cancer Survivors, Behavior Therapy, Humans, Ireland, Neoplasms, Health Behavior, Telemedicine, Nutrition Policy, Cell Phone, Health Communication, 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
