The Mobile App Development and Assessment Guide (MAG): Delphi-Based Validity Study

Abstract

Background In recent years, there has been an exponential growth of mobile health (mHealth)–related apps. This has occurred in a somewhat unsupervised manner. Therefore, having a set of criteria that could be used by all stakeholders to guide the development process and the assessment of the quality of the apps is of most importance. Objective The aim of this paper is to study the validity of the Mobile App Development and Assessment Guide (MAG), a guide recently created to help stakeholders develop and assess mobile health apps. Methods To conduct a validation process of the MAG, we used the Delphi method to reach a consensus among participating stakeholders. We identified 158 potential participants: 45 patients as potential end users, 41 health care professionals, and 72 developers. We sent participants an online survey and asked them to rate how important they considered each item in the guide to be on a scale from 0 to 10. Two rounds were enough to reach consensus. Results In the first round, almost one-third (n=42) of those invited participated, and half of those (n=24) also participated in the second round. Most items in the guide were found to be important to a quality mHealth-related app; a total of 48 criteria were established as important. “Privacy,” “security,” and “usability” were the categories that included most of the important criteria. Conclusions The data supports the validity of the MAG. In addition, the findings identified the criteria that stakeholders consider to be most important. The MAG will help advance the field by providing developers, health care professionals, and end users with a valid guide so that they can develop and identify mHealth-related apps that are of quality.

Educational Needs and Resources for Teachers Working with Students with Chronic Pain: Results of a Delphi Study

“…In this study, we used the stability of responses as the criterion to consider that a consensus had been reached on any given statement [30]. Stability was reached after two rounds (see the Section 3), which is consistent with findings in similar Delphi studies [24,31]. Consensus about the importance of any of the statements was reached when 75% of the participants rated it with at least a 7.…”

Prioritization of Quality Principles for Health Apps Using the Kano Model: Survey Study

“…To identify items of relevance, such as for inclusion in various tools [ 4 - 8 ] meant to aid in assessing such technologies that are to be provided to the respective target groups (eg, physicians or other health care personnel), it is important to identify certain key aspects in the hope that these fulfill the information needs and information-seeking behaviors of users [ 55 ]. Many authors use rather detailed approaches and criteria to enable this information-seeking and more easily assess the quality of health-related apps, and they often target specific (professional) user groups [ 54 ].…”

“…There are numerous, more or less elaborate, tools, norms, and lists of quality criteria that either target developers or aim at aiding those interested in an app in their decision process (eg, [ 3 - 8 ]), and many of the aspects they cover overlap. However, even if interested parties are aware of these approaches, if a quick assessment is desired, these approaches may sometimes be seen as going too far or being too complex.…”

Effects of COVID-19 Social Distancing Measures in Individuals with Chronic Pain Living in Spain in the Late Stages of the Lockdown

“…However, studies show that mobile apps can effectively help to measure pain, (e.g., [30]), and self-manage different pain conditions, such as back pain [45], fibromyalgia [46] or cancer-related pain [47]. Mobile apps should be developed following available guides (e.g., [48], and undergo usability tests and efficacy studies. Future studies should also identify the barriers to the implementation of this technology and also the facilitators.…”