Medical Apps -The Road To Trust
Open accessAbstract
Objectives: With health apps and medical apps gaining popularity, assessing their quality still remains an open question.Users are often unaware of potential pitfalls and unsure whether an app can be trusted.Methods: Following an overview over the current situation (including inherent risks and limits) that also covers existing measures and regulatory questions, additional methods for aiding those preforming app assessments are proposed.Results: Two methods that may aid various stakeholders in their evaluations are outlined.Conclusions: The presented tools are currently being evaluated and open for discussion; we believe them to be easy to use.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 13 · Cited by 15
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- [3]3. WHO. Preamble to the Constitution of the World Health Or- ganization as adopted by the International Health Conference, New York, 19-22 June, 1946; signed: 22 July 1946 by the rep- resentatives of 61 states (Off. Records of the WHO, no. 2, p. 100); entered into force on 7 April 1948; 1948.
- [14]14. JMIR mhealth and uhealth -Apps Peer-Review Launched; 2013 [cited 2014 September 8]. Available from: http://mhealth.jmir.org/announcement/view/67.
- Authors
- Albrecht, U.-V., Pramann, O., & von Jan, U.
- Affiliations
- Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Albrecht, Urs-Vito
- ORCID
- Albrecht, Urs-Vito
- Venue
- European Journal for Biomedical Informatics
- Publisher
- OMICS Publishing Group
- Published
- 2015
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 03
- ISSN
- 1801-5603 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2741348510
- Semantic Scholar
- f4ce6e29f73d31c09fe8e7f82527b0059c5e43aa
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 13
- Citations by year
- 2022: 5 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 3.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- European Journal for Biomedical Informatics (publishedVersion)
- PUB – Publications at Bielefeld University (Bielefeld University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Health, Technology, Consumer Behavior
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Keywords
- mobile health apps, health apps, app quality assessment, digital health regulation
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
