评估印度用户在应用商店中可用的心理健康应用的特征和质量:系统的应用搜索和审查。

IF 6.2 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Seema Mehrotra, Ravikesh Tripathi, Pramita Sengupta, Abhishek Karishiddimath, Angelina Francis, Pratiksha Sharma, Paulomi Sudhir, T K Srikanth, Girish Rao, Rajesh Sagar
{"title":"评估印度用户在应用商店中可用的心理健康应用的特征和质量:系统的应用搜索和审查。","authors":"Seema Mehrotra, Ravikesh Tripathi, Pramita Sengupta, Abhishek Karishiddimath, Angelina Francis, Pratiksha Sharma, Paulomi Sudhir, T K Srikanth, Girish Rao, Rajesh Sagar","doi":"10.2196/79238","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The mental health app sector in India is expanding rapidly, driven by increasing smartphone usage, growing internet penetration, the popularity of digital initiatives, and heightened recognition of mental health challenges in public discourse. This growth is also influenced by both supply- and demand-side barriers to seeking professional help and the rise of mental health tech startups. While digital mental health solutions provide scalable ways to address unmet needs, concerns persist regarding app quality, privacy, and safety due to rapid market expansion, regulatory challenges, and limited empirical research. We conducted a comprehensive and systematic review of smartphone-based mental health apps accessible to Indian users through app stores.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to describe apps in terms of characteristics such as the nature of their functions, involvement of mental health professionals in development, reference to an empirical basis, and inclusion of nudges to seek professional help, as well as to evaluate app quality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review of mental health apps was conducted using the TECH (Target user, Evaluation focus, Connectedness, and Health domain) approach, along with the PASSR (Protocol for App Store Systematic Reviews) checklist. Fifteen search terms covering mental health conditions and therapies were applied to both Google Play and Apple App Store. Identified apps were screened according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria and subsequently downloaded for detailed review. Data were extracted based on prespecified parameters. Additionally, app quality was evaluated using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The initial search identified 5827 apps, of which 350 were reviewed in detail after removing duplicates and applying eligibility criteria. Common search terms such as \"depression\" and \"anxiety\" yielded nearly a quarter of relevant apps (128/495, 25.9% to 133/497, 26.8%); 62 (17.7%) of the 350 reviewed apps originated from Asia, and 131 (37.4%) focused on a single mental health condition. Multifunction apps (eg, those combining assessment and intervention) constituted the largest category (230/350, 65.7%). Privacy concerns were notable; for example, 54 (15.4%) apps did not mention a data-sharing policy. Most apps were developed by commercial organizations, and 228 (65.1%) did not report involvement of mental health professionals, while 45 (12.9%) mentioned it only cursorily. Only 38 (10.9%) apps referenced empirical research, and more than half did not indicate an empirical basis for their content. Pointers to seek professional help were present in 139 (39.7%) apps, mostly in the form of disclaimers, whereas nudges or motivational prompts to seek help appeared in slightly less than a quarter. Only 105 (30%) apps attempted to dispel mental health myths. Functionality and aesthetics ratings on the MARS were relatively high, but 50 (14.3%) apps scored 3 or lower on the information subscale.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study is among the first systematic evaluations of mental health apps accessible to Indian users on Google Play and Apple App Store. The findings provide insights to guide future research, app development, and policy making in the digital mental health space.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (INPLASY) INPLASY2024100035; https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2024-10-0035/.</p><p><strong>International registered report identifier (irrid): </strong>RR2-10.2196/71071.</p>","PeriodicalId":14756,"journal":{"name":"JMIR mHealth and uHealth","volume":"13 ","pages":"e79238"},"PeriodicalIF":6.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12514412/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating Characteristics and Quality of Mental Health Apps Available in App Stores for Indian Users: Systematic App Search and Review.\",\"authors\":\"Seema Mehrotra, Ravikesh Tripathi, Pramita Sengupta, Abhishek Karishiddimath, Angelina Francis, Pratiksha Sharma, Paulomi Sudhir, T K Srikanth, Girish Rao, Rajesh Sagar\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/79238\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The mental health app sector in India is expanding rapidly, driven by increasing smartphone usage, growing internet penetration, the popularity of digital initiatives, and heightened recognition of mental health challenges in public discourse. This growth is also influenced by both supply- and demand-side barriers to seeking professional help and the rise of mental health tech startups. While digital mental health solutions provide scalable ways to address unmet needs, concerns persist regarding app quality, privacy, and safety due to rapid market expansion, regulatory challenges, and limited empirical research. We conducted a comprehensive and systematic review of smartphone-based mental health apps accessible to Indian users through app stores.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to describe apps in terms of characteristics such as the nature of their functions, involvement of mental health professionals in development, reference to an empirical basis, and inclusion of nudges to seek professional help, as well as to evaluate app quality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review of mental health apps was conducted using the TECH (Target user, Evaluation focus, Connectedness, and Health domain) approach, along with the PASSR (Protocol for App Store Systematic Reviews) checklist. Fifteen search terms covering mental health conditions and therapies were applied to both Google Play and Apple App Store. Identified apps were screened according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria and subsequently downloaded for detailed review. Data were extracted based on prespecified parameters. Additionally, app quality was evaluated using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The initial search identified 5827 apps, of which 350 were reviewed in detail after removing duplicates and applying eligibility criteria. Common search terms such as \\\"depression\\\" and \\\"anxiety\\\" yielded nearly a quarter of relevant apps (128/495, 25.9% to 133/497, 26.8%); 62 (17.7%) of the 350 reviewed apps originated from Asia, and 131 (37.4%) focused on a single mental health condition. Multifunction apps (eg, those combining assessment and intervention) constituted the largest category (230/350, 65.7%). Privacy concerns were notable; for example, 54 (15.4%) apps did not mention a data-sharing policy. Most apps were developed by commercial organizations, and 228 (65.1%) did not report involvement of mental health professionals, while 45 (12.9%) mentioned it only cursorily. Only 38 (10.9%) apps referenced empirical research, and more than half did not indicate an empirical basis for their content. Pointers to seek professional help were present in 139 (39.7%) apps, mostly in the form of disclaimers, whereas nudges or motivational prompts to seek help appeared in slightly less than a quarter. Only 105 (30%) apps attempted to dispel mental health myths. Functionality and aesthetics ratings on the MARS were relatively high, but 50 (14.3%) apps scored 3 or lower on the information subscale.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study is among the first systematic evaluations of mental health apps accessible to Indian users on Google Play and Apple App Store. The findings provide insights to guide future research, app development, and policy making in the digital mental health space.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (INPLASY) INPLASY2024100035; https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2024-10-0035/.</p><p><strong>International registered report identifier (irrid): </strong>RR2-10.2196/71071.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14756,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JMIR mHealth and uHealth\",\"volume\":\"13 \",\"pages\":\"e79238\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12514412/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JMIR mHealth and uHealth\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/79238\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR mHealth and uHealth","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/79238","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:由于智能手机使用量的增加、互联网普及率的提高、数字倡议的普及以及公众话语中对精神卫生挑战的高度认识,印度的精神卫生应用程序部门正在迅速扩大。这一增长还受到供需双方寻求专业帮助的障碍,以及心理健康科技初创公司的兴起的影响。虽然数字心理健康解决方案提供了可扩展的方法来解决未满足的需求,但由于市场快速扩张、监管挑战和实证研究有限,人们对应用程序质量、隐私和安全的担忧仍然存在。我们对印度用户可以通过应用程序商店访问的基于智能手机的心理健康应用程序进行了全面而系统的审查。目的:本研究旨在描述应用程序的特征,如其功能的性质,心理健康专业人员参与开发,参考经验基础,包括寻求专业帮助的推动,并评估应用程序的质量。方法:采用TECH(目标用户、评估焦点、连通性和健康领域)方法以及PASSR(应用商店系统审查协议)检查表对心理健康应用程序进行系统审查。在b谷歌Play和苹果应用商店中使用了15个涉及心理健康状况和治疗的搜索词。识别出的应用程序根据预先定义的包含和排除标准进行筛选,随后下载进行详细审查。根据预先设定的参数提取数据。此外,应用程序质量使用移动应用程序评级量表(MARS)进行评估。结果:最初的搜索确定了5827个应用程序,其中350个在删除重复并应用资格标准后进行了详细审查。“抑郁”和“焦虑”等常见搜索词产生了近四分之一的相关应用(128/ 495,25.9%至133/ 497,26.8%);在350个被审查的应用程序中,有62个(17.7%)来自亚洲,131个(37.4%)专注于单一的心理健康状况。多功能应用程序(例如,结合评估和干预的应用程序)构成了最大的类别(230/350,65.7%)。隐私问题值得注意;例如,54个(15.4%)应用程序没有提到数据共享政策。大多数应用程序是由商业组织开发的,228个(65.1%)没有报告心理健康专业人员的参与,而45个(12.9%)只是粗略地提到了这一点。只有38个(10.9%)应用程序引用了实证研究,超过一半的应用程序没有表明其内容的实证基础。寻求专业帮助的提示出现在139个(39.7%)应用程序中,大多以免责声明的形式出现,而寻求帮助的提示或激励性提示出现在略低于四分之一的应用程序中。只有105个(30%)应用程序试图消除心理健康神话。MARS上的功能和美学评分相对较高,但有50款(14.3%)应用在信息子量表上得分在3分或更低。结论:这项研究是对印度用户在b谷歌Play和苹果应用商店上可访问的心理健康应用程序进行的首批系统评估之一。这些发现为指导未来在数字心理健康领域的研究、应用程序开发和政策制定提供了见解。试验注册:国际系统评价与荟萃分析协议注册平台(INPLASY) INPLASY2024100035;https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2024-10-0035/.International注册报告标识符(irrid): RR2-10.2196/71071。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Evaluating Characteristics and Quality of Mental Health Apps Available in App Stores for Indian Users: Systematic App Search and Review.

Evaluating Characteristics and Quality of Mental Health Apps Available in App Stores for Indian Users: Systematic App Search and Review.

Background: The mental health app sector in India is expanding rapidly, driven by increasing smartphone usage, growing internet penetration, the popularity of digital initiatives, and heightened recognition of mental health challenges in public discourse. This growth is also influenced by both supply- and demand-side barriers to seeking professional help and the rise of mental health tech startups. While digital mental health solutions provide scalable ways to address unmet needs, concerns persist regarding app quality, privacy, and safety due to rapid market expansion, regulatory challenges, and limited empirical research. We conducted a comprehensive and systematic review of smartphone-based mental health apps accessible to Indian users through app stores.

Objective: This study aims to describe apps in terms of characteristics such as the nature of their functions, involvement of mental health professionals in development, reference to an empirical basis, and inclusion of nudges to seek professional help, as well as to evaluate app quality.

Methods: This systematic review of mental health apps was conducted using the TECH (Target user, Evaluation focus, Connectedness, and Health domain) approach, along with the PASSR (Protocol for App Store Systematic Reviews) checklist. Fifteen search terms covering mental health conditions and therapies were applied to both Google Play and Apple App Store. Identified apps were screened according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria and subsequently downloaded for detailed review. Data were extracted based on prespecified parameters. Additionally, app quality was evaluated using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS).

Results: The initial search identified 5827 apps, of which 350 were reviewed in detail after removing duplicates and applying eligibility criteria. Common search terms such as "depression" and "anxiety" yielded nearly a quarter of relevant apps (128/495, 25.9% to 133/497, 26.8%); 62 (17.7%) of the 350 reviewed apps originated from Asia, and 131 (37.4%) focused on a single mental health condition. Multifunction apps (eg, those combining assessment and intervention) constituted the largest category (230/350, 65.7%). Privacy concerns were notable; for example, 54 (15.4%) apps did not mention a data-sharing policy. Most apps were developed by commercial organizations, and 228 (65.1%) did not report involvement of mental health professionals, while 45 (12.9%) mentioned it only cursorily. Only 38 (10.9%) apps referenced empirical research, and more than half did not indicate an empirical basis for their content. Pointers to seek professional help were present in 139 (39.7%) apps, mostly in the form of disclaimers, whereas nudges or motivational prompts to seek help appeared in slightly less than a quarter. Only 105 (30%) apps attempted to dispel mental health myths. Functionality and aesthetics ratings on the MARS were relatively high, but 50 (14.3%) apps scored 3 or lower on the information subscale.

Conclusions: This study is among the first systematic evaluations of mental health apps accessible to Indian users on Google Play and Apple App Store. The findings provide insights to guide future research, app development, and policy making in the digital mental health space.

Trial registration: International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (INPLASY) INPLASY2024100035; https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2024-10-0035/.

International registered report identifier (irrid): RR2-10.2196/71071.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
JMIR mHealth and uHealth Medicine-Health Informatics
CiteScore
12.60
自引率
4.00%
发文量
159
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: JMIR mHealth and uHealth (JMU, ISSN 2291-5222) is a spin-off journal of JMIR, the leading eHealth journal (Impact Factor 2016: 5.175). JMIR mHealth and uHealth is indexed in PubMed, PubMed Central, and Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE), and in June 2017 received a stunning inaugural Impact Factor of 4.636. The journal focusses on health and biomedical applications in mobile and tablet computing, pervasive and ubiquitous computing, wearable computing and domotics. JMIR mHealth and uHealth publishes since 2013 and was the first mhealth journal in Pubmed. It publishes even faster and has a broader scope with including papers which are more technical or more formative/developmental than what would be published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信