Cited by 201Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsHealth, Technology, Consumer BehaviorDigital Mental Health Interventions

Many Mobile Health Apps Target High-Need, High-Cost Populations, But Gaps Remain

Singh, Karandeep, Drouin, Kaitlin, Newmark, Lisa P., Lee, JaeHo, Faxvaag, Arild, Rozenblum, Ronen, Pabo, Erika A., Landman, Adam +2 more·2016·Health Affairs

Abstract

With rising smartphone ownership, mobile health applications (mHealth apps) have the potential to support high-need, high-cost populations in managing their health. While the number of available mHealth apps has grown substantially, no clear strategy has emerged on how providers should evaluate and recommend such apps to patients. Key stakeholders, including medical professional societies, insurers, and policy makers, have largely avoided formally recommending apps, which forces patients to obtain recommendations from other sources. To help stakeholders overcome barriers to reviewing and recommending apps, we evaluated 137 patient-facing mHealth apps-those intended for use by patients to manage their health-that were highly rated by consumers and recommended by experts and that targeted high-need, high-cost populations. We found that there is a wide variety of apps in the marketplace but that few apps address the needs of the patients who could benefit the most. We also found that consumers' ratings were poor indications of apps' clinical utility or usability and that most apps did not respond appropriately when a user entered potentially dangerous health information. Going forward, data privacy and security will continue to be major concerns in the dissemination of mHealth apps.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1377/hlthaff.2016.0578

Cites

12 of 12 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?

  • Many apps popular with patients are not seen as high quality by clinicians.

    “Furthermore, many apps popular with patients are not seen as high quality by clinicians.”

    From What is the clinical value of mHealth for patients? (2020) · cites this paper as [32]

  • The quality of the mHealth literature is highly variable with few studies registered on clincaltrials.gov and many of the apps studied not available on the iOS or Android app store.

    “The quality of the mHealth literature is highly variable with few studies registered on clincaltrials.gov and many of the apps studied not available on the iOS or Android app store.”

    From What is the clinical value of mHealth for patients? (2020) · cites this paper as [32]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Singh, K., Drouin, K., Newmark, L. P., Lee, J., Faxvaag, A., Rozenblum, R., Pabo, E. A., Landman, A., Klinger, E., & Bates, D. W.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • Lisa P. Newmark is a project manager in the Information Systems Department at Partners HealthCare, in Wellesley, Massachusetts.
  • JaeHo Lee is an associate professor of biomedical informatics at the Asan Medical Center, in Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Venue
Health Affairs
Published
2016-12
Volume
35
Issue
12
Pages
2310-2318
ISSN
  • 0278-2715 (ISSN-L)
  • 1544-5208
OpenAlex
W2560643553
Cited by
201
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 16
FWCI
36.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Health Affairs (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Health, Technology, Consumer Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
mobile health apps, mobile health, app evaluation, app recommendations, consumer ratings, clinical utility, usability, health data privacy, data security, patient self-management
MeSH terms
Smartphone, Chronic Disease, Consumer Behavior, Humans, Self Care, Comorbidity, Telemedicine, Patient Safety, 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