CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,274Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsHealth, Technology, Consumer BehaviorDigital Mental Health Interventions

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Health App Use Among US Mobile Phone Owners: A National Survey

Open access
Krebs, Paul, Duncan, Dustin T·2015·JMIR mHealth and uHealth
DOI 10.2196/mhealth.4924PMC PMC4704953
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mobile phone health apps may now seem to be ubiquitous, yet much remains unknown with regard to their usage. Information is limited with regard to important metrics, including the percentage of the population that uses health apps, reasons for adoption/nonadoption, and reasons for noncontinuance of use. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine health app use among mobile phone owners in the United States. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 1604 mobile phone users throughout the United States. The 36-item survey assessed sociodemographic characteristics, history of and reasons for health app use/nonuse, perceived effectiveness of health apps, reasons for stopping use, and general health status. RESULTS: A little over half (934/1604, 58.23%) of mobile phone users had downloaded a health-related mobile app. Fitness and nutrition were the most common categories of health apps used, with most respondents using them at least daily. Common reasons for not having downloaded apps were lack of interest, cost, and concern about apps collecting their data. Individuals more likely to use health apps tended to be younger, have higher incomes, be more educated, be Latino/Hispanic, and have a body mass index (BMI) in the obese range (all P<.05). Cost was a significant concern among respondents, with a large proportion indicating that they would not pay anything for a health app. Interestingly, among those who had downloaded health apps, trust in their accuracy and data safety was quite high, and most felt that the apps had improved their health. About half of the respondents (427/934, 45.7%) had stopped using some health apps, primarily due to high data entry burden, loss of interest, and hidden costs. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that while many individuals use health apps, a substantial proportion of the population does not, and that even among those who use health apps, many stop using them. These data suggest that app developers need to better address consumer concerns, such as cost and high data entry burden, and that clinical trials are necessary to test the efficacy of health apps to broaden their appeal and adoption.

Overview

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/mhealth.4924

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 US distribution of sample by ZIP code.
Figure 1 US distribution of sample by ZIP code.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Show all 11 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 901–1,000 of 1,000

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Krebs, P., & Duncan, D. T.
Affiliations
  • VA NY Harbor Healthcare System (US)
  • New York University (US)
Corresponding author
Krebs, Paul
ORCID
Venue
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
Publisher
JMIR Publications Inc.
Published
2015-11-04
Volume
3
Issue
4
Pages
e101
ISSN
2291-5222 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2196/mhealth.4924
PMC
PMC4704953
OpenAlex
W2126335261
Cited by
1,274
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 47 · 2025: 98 · 2024: 101 · 2023: 128 · 2022: 127 · 2021: 156 · 2020: 211 · 2019: 140 · 2018: 151 · 2017: 85 · 2016: 28
FWCI
160.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR mhealth and uhealth (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Verizon Foundation
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
health apps, mobile health, app adoption, fitness apps, nutrition apps, data privacy concerns, app cost, obesity

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