Cited by 346Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsDigital Mental Health InterventionsMobile Learning in Education

A lot of action, but not in the right direction: systematic review and content analysis of smartphone applications for the prevention, detection, and management of cancer

Open access
Bender, Jacqueline Lorene, Yue, Rossini Ying Kwan, To, Matthew Jason, Deacken, Laetitia, Jadad, Alejandro R·2013·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mobile phones have become nearly ubiquitous, offering a promising means to deliver health interventions. However, little is known about smartphone applications (apps) for cancer. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to characterize the purpose and content of cancer-focused smartphone apps available for use by the general public and the evidence on their utility or effectiveness. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the official application stores for the four major smartphone platforms: iPhone, Android, Nokia, and BlackBerry. Apps were included in the review if they were focused on cancer and available for use by the general public. This was complemented by a systematic review of literature from MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify evaluations of cancer-related smartphone apps. RESULTS: A total of 295 apps from the smartphone app stores met the inclusion criteria. The majority of apps targeted breast cancer (46.8%, 138/295) or cancer in general (28.5%, 84/295). The reported app purpose was predominantly to raise awareness about cancer (32.2%, 95/295) or to provide educational information about cancer (26.4%, 78/295), followed by apps to support fundraising efforts (12.9%, 38/295), assist in early detection (11.5%, 34/295), promote a charitable organization (10.2%, 30/295), support disease management (3.7%, 11/295), cancer prevention (2.0%, 6/295), or social support (1.0%, 3/295). The majority of the apps did not describe their organizational affiliation (64.1%, 189/295). Apps affiliated with non-profit organizations were more likely to be free of cost (χ(2) 1=16.3, P<.001) and have a fundraising or awareness purpose (χ(2) 2=13.3, P=.001). The review of the health literature yielded 594 articles, none of which reported an evaluation of a cancer-focused smartphone application. CONCLUSIONS: There are hundreds of cancer-focused apps with the potential to enhance efforts to promote behavior change, to monitor a host of symptoms and physiological indicators of disease, and to provide real-time supportive interventions, conveniently and at low cost. However, there is a lack of evidence on their utility, effectiveness, and safety. Future efforts should focus on improving and consolidating the evidence base into a whitelist for public consumption.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/jmir.2661

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [18]International Data Coporation (IDC) International Data Corporation (IDC) 2012 11 01 International Data Corporation Press Release: Android marks fourth anniversay since launch with 75.0% Market Share in Third Quarter, According to IDC http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS23771812

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bender, J. L., Yue, R. Y. K., To, M. J., Deacken, L., & Jadad, A. R.
Affiliations
University Health Network (CA)
Corresponding author
Bender, Jacqueline Lorene
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2013-12-23
Volume
15
Issue
12
Pages
e287
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2164995937
Cited by
346
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 42 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 13
FWCI
3.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Mobile Learning in Education
Keywords
cancer, mobile application, mobile health, cancer prevention, early cancer detection, cancer management, breast cancer, app store analysis, app evaluation, nonprofit organizations, cancer awareness, health behavior change, app security and privacy
MeSH terms
Female, Health Promotion, Humans, Male, Neoplasms, Telemedicine, Risk Reduction Behavior, Cell Phone, 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