Characteristics and Quality of Mobile Apps Containing Prenatal Genetic Testing Information: Systematic App Store Search and Assessment

Background Prenatal genetic testing is an essential part of routine prenatal care. Yet, obstetricians often lack the time to provide comprehensive prenatal genetic testing education to their patients. Pregnant women lack prenatal genetic testing knowledge, which may hinder informed decision-making during their pregnancies. Due to the rapid growth of technology, mobile apps are a potentially valuable educational tool through which pregnant women can learn about prenatal genetic testing and improve the quality of their communication with obstetricians. The characteristics, quality, and number of available apps containing prenatal genetic testing information are, however, unknown. Objective This study aims to conduct a firstreview to identify, evaluate, and summarize currently available mobile apps that contain prenatal genetic testing information using a systematic approach. Methods We searched both the Apple App Store and Google Play for mobile apps containing prenatal genetic testing information. The quality of apps was assessed based on the criteria adopted from two commonly used and validated mobile app scoring systems, including the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) and the APPLICATIONS evaluation criteria. Results A total of 64 mobile apps were identified. Of these, only 2 apps were developed for a specific prenatal genetic test. All others were either pregnancy-related (61/64, 95%) or genetics-related (1/64, 2%) apps that provided prenatal genetic testing information. The majority of the apps (49/64, 77%) were developed by commercial companies. The mean quality assessment score of the included apps was 13.5 (SD 2.9), which was equal to the average of possible theoretical score. Overall, the main weaknesses of mobile apps in this review included the limited number of prenatal genetic tests mentioned; incomprehensiveness of testing information; unreliable and missing information sources; absence of developmental testing with users (not evidence based); high level of readability; and the lack of visual information, customization, and a text search field. Conclusions Our findings suggest that the quality of mobile apps with prenatal genetic testing information must be improved and that pregnant women should be cautious when using these apps for prenatal genetic testing information. Obstetricians should carefully examine mobile apps before referring any of them to their patients for use as an educational tool. Both improving the quality of existing mobile apps, and developing new, evidence-based, high-quality mobile apps targeting all prenatal genetic tests should be the focus of mobile app developers going forward.

[1]  K. Banks,et al.  Facing the challenge of genetic counselors' need for rapid continuing education about genomic technologies , 2020, Journal of genetic counseling.

[2]  Karen Luetsch,et al.  The influence of mobile health applications on patient - healthcare provider relationships: A systematic, narrative review. , 2019, Patient education and counseling.

[3]  Katherine T. Chen,et al.  Evaluation of Smartphone Menstrual Cycle Tracking Applications Using an Adapted APPLICATIONS Scoring System , 2016, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[4]  H. Skirton,et al.  Women's knowledge and use of prenatal screening tests , 2017, Journal of clinical nursing.

[5]  Katherine T. Chen,et al.  Rating Pregnancy Wheel Applications Using the APPLICATIONS Scoring System , 2015, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[6]  Lei Xu,et al.  Autism genetic testing: a qualitative study of awareness, attitudes, and experiences among parents of children with autism spectrum disorders , 2013, Genetics in Medicine.

[7]  Randa L. Shehab,et al.  Educational Apps: Using Mobile Applications to Enhance Student Learning of Statistical Concepts , 2014 .

[8]  Ralph Nanan,et al.  An emerging model of maternity care: smartphone, midwife, doctor? , 2014, Women and birth : journal of the Australian College of Midwives.

[9]  K. Gwet,et al.  A comparison of Cohen’s Kappa and Gwet’s AC1 when calculating inter-rater reliability coefficients: a study conducted with personality disorder samples , 2013, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[10]  M. Rollo,et al.  A review of pregnancy apps freely available in the Google Play Store. , 2020, Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals.

[11]  Betsy L. Gammon,et al.  "I think we've got too many tests!": Prenatal providers' reflections on ethical and clinical challenges in the practice integration of cell-free DNA screening. , 2016, Ethics, medicine, and public health.

[12]  Divya Talwar,et al.  Characteristics and evaluation outcomes of genomics curricula for health professional students: a systematic literature review , 2018, Genetics in Medicine.

[13]  J. Gunn,et al.  Exploring general practitioners' experience of informing women about prenatal screening tests for foetal abnormalities: A qualitative focus group study , 2008, BMC health services research.

[14]  M. Norton,et al.  What are the goals of prenatal genetic testing? , 2018, Seminars in perinatology.

[15]  L. Trevena,et al.  Improving women’s knowledge about prenatal screening in the era of non-invasive prenatal testing for Down syndrome – development and acceptability of a low literacy decision aid , 2018, BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth.

[16]  Divya Talwar,et al.  Characteristics and quality of genetics and genomics mobile apps: a systematic review , 2019, European Journal of Human Genetics.

[17]  Lei-Shih Chen,et al.  Pregnant Hispanic women's views and knowledge of prenatal genetic testing , 2021, Journal of genetic counseling.

[18]  Oksana Zelenko,et al.  Mobile App Rating Scale: A New Tool for Assessing the Quality of Health Mobile Apps , 2015, JMIR mHealth and uHealth.

[19]  P. Krebs,et al.  Health App Use Among US Mobile Phone Owners: A National Survey , 2015, JMIR mHealth and uHealth.