Cited by 15Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsDigital Mental Health InterventionsCancer survivorship and care

An Evaluation of Interactive mHealth Applications for Adults Living with Cancer

Open access
Wasserman, Sydney, Ould Brahim, Lydia, Attiya, Ameer, Belzile, Eric, Lambert, Sylvie D.·2023·Current Oncology

Abstract

This study evaluated the quality and usefulness of interactive mobile health (mHealth) applications (apps) for adults with cancer. The PRISMA guidelines were followed to add rigor to the search, as well as to the data collection and analysis. The apps available in the most used app stores (Google Play and Apple) with interactive tailored features were identified. To supplement this, a Google web search was also conducted. The apps were evaluated for their quality using the validated Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) and for their usefulness using a checklist of end users‘ desired features derived from the literature. The searches returned 3046 apps and 17 were retained for evaluation. The average quality score of the apps across the sample was 3.62/5 (SD 0.26, range: 3.14–4.06), with Outcomes4me scoring the highest. On average, the apps scored 50% (SD 2.5, range: 31–88%) on the usefulness checklist, with Cancer.net scoring the highest. The lowest-scoring categories were communications features on the usefulness checklist and “information” on the MARS, indicating areas for future work. The findings identified the apps of an acceptable quality and usefulness that could be recommended to those with cancer.

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 · 10.3390/curroncol30080518

Cites

60 of 60 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?

  • Breast cancer survivors are open to technology-based support.

    “breast cancer survivors are open to technology-based support [27,28].”

    From Co-Designing the MOSAIC mHealth App With Breast Cancer Survivors: User-Centered Design Approach (2024) · cites this paper as [27]

    The Introduction (page not provided) says mHealth apps have generally been found acceptable to patients and describes potential benefits for people with cancer. It does not specifically establish that breast cancer survivors are open to technology-based support; the cited paper evaluates apps for adults with cancer rather than surveying that survivor group. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wasserman, S., Ould Brahim, L., Attiya, A., Belzile, E., & Lambert, S. D.
Affiliations
  • St Mary's Hospital Centre (CA)
  • St. Mary’s Research Centre, Montreal, QC H3T 1M5, Canada
  • Université de Montréal (CA)
Corresponding author
Lambert, Sylvie D.
Venue
Current Oncology
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2023-07-25
Volume
30
Issue
8
Pages
7151-7166
ISSN
  • 1198-0052 (ISSN-L)
  • 1718-7729
OpenAlex
W4385273418
Cited by
15
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 4
FWCI
5.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Oncology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • McGill University Faculty of Medicine’s Raymond and Leora Kahn Research Summer Bursary
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)—Canada Graduate Scholarship for Master’s Program and an End of Master’s studies MES award
  • Fonds de recherche santé Québec (FRQS), Réseau de recherche portant sur les interventions en sciences infirmières du Québec (RRISIQ), and the Bureau de coopération interuniversitaire (BCI)
  • CIHR Canada Research Chair (Tier 2)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
Keywords
mobile health apps, cancer, app quality, Mobile App Rating Scale, precision oncology
MeSH terms
Adult, Communication, Data Collection, Humans, Neoplasms, Telemedicine, 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