Cited by 108Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationDigital Mental Health Interventions

A systematic review of smartphone applications for chronic pain available for download in the United States

Wallace, PhD, Lorraine S., Dhingra, PhD, Lara K.·2014·Journal of Opioid Management

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: A Smartphone app could be useful in aiding patients in self-monitoring and self-managing their chronic pain-related symptoms. The purpose of this study was to systematically review English-language pain-related Smartphone apps available for download in the United States. DESIGN: During July 2012, official Android, BlackBerry, and iPhone Smartphone app platform stores were searched. "Pain" was entered into the search-bar of each Smartphone app store. Of the pain apps meeting inclusion criteria, the following were retrieved: release date, download cost (US dollars [US $], file size, documentation of a healthcare professional's (HCP) involvement in app development, primary purpose of the app (pain education, pain self-management, or a combination of pain education and self-management), targeted pain-related condition(s), and inclusion of features that addressed four common self-monitoring and/or management strategies. RESULTS: Of the 220 apps meeting inclusion criteria, the majority were available through the iPhone (80.0 percent). The cost for downloading each app ranged from US $0.00 to 89.99; however, the majority of apps were ≤US $4.99. There was no evidence of HCP involvement in the development of the majority of apps (65.0 percent). Chronic, nonspecific pain was the focus of half (50.5 percent) of the apps, followed by back and/or neck pain (25.9 percent). The primary purpose of the apps was categorized as follows: pain education (n = 53, 24.1 percent), pain self-management (n = 137, 62.3 percent), and both pain education and self management (n = 30, 13.6 percent). CONCLUSION: Overall, most of the pain-related apps included within our review not only lacked evidence of HCP input regarding development but also contained few evidence-based pain management features.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5055/jom.2014.0193

Cites

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wallace, P., & Dhingra, P.
Venue
Journal of Opioid Management
Published
2014-01-01
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
63-68
ISSN
1551-7489 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2059040501
Cited by
108
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 10
FWCI
25.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Opioid Management (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
mobile application, chronic pain, pain self-management, pain education, self-monitoring, app store search, healthcare professional involvement, app cost, neck and back pain
MeSH terms
Humans, Patient Education as Topic, Self Care, United States, Telemedicine, Computers, Handheld, Cell Phone, Chronic Pain

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