Guadalupe Esmeralda Rivera García, Miriam Janet Cervantes López, Juan Carlos Ramírez Vázquez, Arturo Llanes Castillo, Jaime Cruz Casados
{"title":"回顾人体解剖学教学的移动应用程序:搜索和质量评估研究。","authors":"Guadalupe Esmeralda Rivera García, Miriam Janet Cervantes López, Juan Carlos Ramírez Vázquez, Arturo Llanes Castillo, Jaime Cruz Casados","doi":"10.2196/64550","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mobile apps designed for teaching human anatomy offer a flexible, interactive, and personalized learning platform, enriching the educational experience for both students and health care professionals.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to conduct a systematic review of the human anatomy mobile apps available on Google Play, evaluate their quality, highlight the highest scoring apps, and determine the relationship between objective quality ratings and subjective star ratings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) was used to evaluate the apps. The intraclass correlation coefficient was calculated using a consistency-type 2-factor random model to measure the reliability of the evaluations made by the experts. In addition, Pearson correlations were used to analyze the relationship between MARS quality scores and subjective evaluations of MARS quality item 23.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mobile apps with the highest overall quality scores according to the MARS (ie, sections A, B, C, and D) were Organos internos 3D (anatomía) (version 4.34), Sistema óseo en 3D (Anatomía) (version 4.32), and VOKA Anatomy Pro (version 4.29). To measure the reliability of the MARS quality evaluations (sections A, B, C, and D), the intraclass correlation coefficient was used, and the result was \"excellent.\" Finally, Pearson correlation results revealed a significant relationship (r=0.989; P<.001) between the quality assessments conducted by health care professionals and the subjective evaluations of item 23.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The average evaluation results of the selected apps indicated a \"good\" level of quality, and those with the highest ratings could be recommended. However, the lack of scientific backing for these technological tools is evident. It is crucial that research centers and higher education institutions commit to the active development of new mobile health apps, ensuring their accessibility and validation for the general public.</p>","PeriodicalId":36236,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Medical Education","volume":"11 ","pages":"e64550"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11888001/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reviewing Mobile Apps for Teaching Human Anatomy: Search and Quality Evaluation Study.\",\"authors\":\"Guadalupe Esmeralda Rivera García, Miriam Janet Cervantes López, Juan Carlos Ramírez Vázquez, Arturo Llanes Castillo, Jaime Cruz Casados\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/64550\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mobile apps designed for teaching human anatomy offer a flexible, interactive, and personalized learning platform, enriching the educational experience for both students and health care professionals.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to conduct a systematic review of the human anatomy mobile apps available on Google Play, evaluate their quality, highlight the highest scoring apps, and determine the relationship between objective quality ratings and subjective star ratings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) was used to evaluate the apps. The intraclass correlation coefficient was calculated using a consistency-type 2-factor random model to measure the reliability of the evaluations made by the experts. In addition, Pearson correlations were used to analyze the relationship between MARS quality scores and subjective evaluations of MARS quality item 23.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mobile apps with the highest overall quality scores according to the MARS (ie, sections A, B, C, and D) were Organos internos 3D (anatomía) (version 4.34), Sistema óseo en 3D (Anatomía) (version 4.32), and VOKA Anatomy Pro (version 4.29). To measure the reliability of the MARS quality evaluations (sections A, B, C, and D), the intraclass correlation coefficient was used, and the result was \\\"excellent.\\\" Finally, Pearson correlation results revealed a significant relationship (r=0.989; P<.001) between the quality assessments conducted by health care professionals and the subjective evaluations of item 23.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The average evaluation results of the selected apps indicated a \\\"good\\\" level of quality, and those with the highest ratings could be recommended. However, the lack of scientific backing for these technological tools is evident. It is crucial that research centers and higher education institutions commit to the active development of new mobile health apps, ensuring their accessibility and validation for the general public.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36236,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JMIR Medical Education\",\"volume\":\"11 \",\"pages\":\"e64550\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11888001/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JMIR Medical Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/64550\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/64550","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:为人体解剖学教学设计的移动应用程序提供了一个灵活、互动和个性化的学习平台,丰富了学生和医疗保健专业人员的教育体验。目的:本研究旨在对谷歌Play上可用的人体解剖学移动应用程序进行系统评价,评估其质量,突出得分最高的应用程序,并确定客观质量评分与主观星级评分之间的关系。方法:采用移动应用评定量表(MARS)对应用程序进行评定。采用一致性型双因素随机模型计算类内相关系数,衡量专家评价的信度。此外,采用Pearson相关分析MARS质量分数与MARS质量项目23主观评价之间的关系。结果:根据MARS(即A、B、C、D部分)综合质量得分最高的移动应用程序为Organos internos 3D (anatomía)(版本4.34)、Sistema óseo en 3D (Anatomía)(版本4.32)和VOKA Anatomy Pro(版本4.29)。为了测量MARS质量评估(A、B、C和D部分)的可靠性,使用了类内相关系数,结果为“优秀”。最后,Pearson相关结果显示两者之间存在显著相关(r=0.989;p结论:所选应用程序的平均评价结果为“良好”水平,评分最高的应用程序可以推荐。然而,这些技术工具显然缺乏科学依据。至关重要的是,研究中心和高等教育机构致力于积极开发新的移动健康应用程序,确保它们的可访问性和对公众的验证。
Reviewing Mobile Apps for Teaching Human Anatomy: Search and Quality Evaluation Study.
Background: Mobile apps designed for teaching human anatomy offer a flexible, interactive, and personalized learning platform, enriching the educational experience for both students and health care professionals.
Objective: This study aimed to conduct a systematic review of the human anatomy mobile apps available on Google Play, evaluate their quality, highlight the highest scoring apps, and determine the relationship between objective quality ratings and subjective star ratings.
Methods: The Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) was used to evaluate the apps. The intraclass correlation coefficient was calculated using a consistency-type 2-factor random model to measure the reliability of the evaluations made by the experts. In addition, Pearson correlations were used to analyze the relationship between MARS quality scores and subjective evaluations of MARS quality item 23.
Results: The mobile apps with the highest overall quality scores according to the MARS (ie, sections A, B, C, and D) were Organos internos 3D (anatomía) (version 4.34), Sistema óseo en 3D (Anatomía) (version 4.32), and VOKA Anatomy Pro (version 4.29). To measure the reliability of the MARS quality evaluations (sections A, B, C, and D), the intraclass correlation coefficient was used, and the result was "excellent." Finally, Pearson correlation results revealed a significant relationship (r=0.989; P<.001) between the quality assessments conducted by health care professionals and the subjective evaluations of item 23.
Conclusions: The average evaluation results of the selected apps indicated a "good" level of quality, and those with the highest ratings could be recommended. However, the lack of scientific backing for these technological tools is evident. It is crucial that research centers and higher education institutions commit to the active development of new mobile health apps, ensuring their accessibility and validation for the general public.