An Assessment Framework for e-Mental Health Apps in Canada: Results of a Modified Delphi Process

Background The number of e-mental health apps is increasing rapidly. Studies have shown that the use of some apps is beneficial, whereas others are ineffective or do not meet users’ privacy expectations. Individuals and organizations that curate, recommend, host, use, or pay for apps have an interest in categorizing apps according to the consensus criteria of usability and effectiveness. Others have previously published recommendations for assessing health-related apps; however, the extent to which these recommendations can be generalized across different population groups (eg, culture, gender, and language) remains unclear. This study describes an attempt by Canadian stakeholders to develop an e-mental health assessment framework that responds to the unique needs of people living in Canada in an evidence-based manner. Objective The objective of our study was to achieve consensus from a broad group of Canadian stakeholders on guiding principles and criteria for a framework to assess e-mental health apps in Canada. Methods We developed an initial set of guiding principles and criteria from a rapid review and environmental scan of pre-existing app assessment frameworks. The initial list was refined through a two-round modified Delphi process. Participants (N=25) included app developers and users, health care providers, mental health advocates, people with lived experience of a mental health problem or mental illness, policy makers, and researchers. Consensus on each guideline or criterion was defined a priori as at least 70% agreement. The first round of voting was conducted electronically. Prior to Round 2 voting, in-person presentations from experts and a persona empathy mapping process were used to explore the perspectives of diverse stakeholders. Results Of all respondents, 68% (17/25) in Round 1 and 100% (13/13) in Round 2 agreed that a framework for evaluating health apps is needed to help Canadian consumers identify high-quality apps. Consensus was reached on 9 guiding principles: evidence based, gender responsive, culturally appropriate, user centered, risk based, internationally aligned, enabling innovation, transparent and fair, and based on ethical norms. In addition, 15 informative and evaluative criteria were defined to assess the effectiveness, functionality, clinical applicability, interoperability, usability, transparency regarding security and privacy, security or privacy standards, supported platforms, targeted users, developers’ transparency, funding transparency, price, user desirability, user inclusion, and meaningful inclusion of a diverse range of communities. Conclusions Canadian mental health stakeholders reached the consensus on a framework of 9 guiding principles and 15 criteria important in assessing e-mental health apps. What differentiates the Canadian framework from other scales is explicit attention to user inclusion at all stages of the development, gender responsiveness, and cultural appropriateness. Furthermore, an empathy mapping process markedly influenced the development of the framework. This framework may be used to inform future mental health policies and programs.

[1]  R. Brook,et al.  Consensus methods: characteristics and guidelines for use. , 1984, American journal of public health.

[2]  A. Abernethy,et al.  Consensus-based standards for best supportive care in clinical trials in advanced cancer. , 2012, The Lancet. Oncology.

[3]  Edward H. Lee American society of health-system pharmacists. , 2011, P & T : a peer-reviewed journal for formulary management.

[4]  John Torous,et al.  Towards a Framework for Evaluating Mobile Mental Health Apps. , 2015, Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association.

[5]  Allison Gates,et al.  Evaluating User Perceptions of Mobile Medication Management Applications With Older Adults: A Usability Study , 2014, JMIR mHealth and uHealth.

[6]  Mark Erik Larsen,et al.  Mobile Apps for Bipolar Disorder: A Systematic Review of Features and Content Quality , 2015, Journal of medical Internet research.

[7]  Y. Joanette,et al.  Gender, Work, and Aging , 2016, Canadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement.

[8]  Zhicheng Wang,et al.  Challenges in Assessing Mobile Health App Quality: A Systematic Review of Prevalent and Innovative Methods. , 2016, American journal of preventive medicine.

[9]  L. Findlay,et al.  Perceived need for mental health care in Canada: Results from the 2012 Canadian Community Health Survey-Mental Health. , 2013, Health reports.

[10]  Urs-Vito Albrecht,et al.  Transparency of Health-Apps for Trust and Decision Making , 2013, Journal of medical Internet research.

[11]  N. Dalkey,et al.  An Experimental Application of the Delphi Method to the Use of Experts , 1963 .

[12]  O. Sibony,et al.  Using and Reporting the Delphi Method for Selecting Healthcare Quality Indicators: A Systematic Review , 2011, PloS one.

[13]  Pasquale Fiore,et al.  How to Evaluate Mobile Health Applications: A Scoping Review , 2017, ITCH.

[14]  John Torous,et al.  The efficacy of smartphone‐based mental health interventions for depressive symptoms: a meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials , 2017, World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association.

[15]  Mark R. Wilson,et al.  Using a Delphi Technique to Seek Consensus Regarding Definitions, Descriptions and Classification of Terms Related to Implicit and Explicit Forms of Motor Learning , 2014, PloS one.

[16]  Karim Keshavjee,et al.  Health Apps by Design: A Reference Architecture for Mobile Engagement , 2016, Int. J. Handheld Comput. Res..

[17]  Hugh McKenna,et al.  Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique: Delphi survey technique , 2000 .

[18]  N. Rickard,et al.  Mental Health Smartphone Apps: Review and Evidence-Based Recommendations for Future Developments , 2016, JMIR mental health.

[19]  J. L. Bender,et al.  Finding a Depression App: A Review and Content Analysis of the Depression App Marketplace , 2015, JMIR mHealth and uHealth.

[20]  Dipankar Dasgupta,et al.  Privacy and security issues in mobile health: Current research and future directions , 2017 .

[21]  Trevor van Mierlo,et al.  Lessons Learned From Using Focus Groups to Refine Digital Interventions , 2015, JMIR research protocols.

[22]  Jaeho Lee,et al.  Developing a Framework for Evaluating the Patient Engagement, Quality, and Safety of Mobile Health Applications. , 2016, Issue brief.

[23]  Margot Brereton,et al.  A Collaborative Rapid Persona-Building Workshop: Creating Design Personas with Health Researchers , 2014, Int. J. Sociotechnology Knowl. Dev..

[24]  Josip Car,et al.  Unaddressed privacy risks in accredited health and wellness apps: a cross-sectional systematic assessment , 2015, BMC Medicine.

[25]  H. Christensen,et al.  A Systematic Assessment of Smartphone Tools for Suicide Prevention , 2016, PloS one.

[26]  G. William Walster,et al.  A comparative study of differences in subjective likelihood estimates made by individuals, interacting groups, Delphi groups, and nominal groups☆ , 1973 .

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

[28]  H. Christensen,et al.  Smartphones for Smarter Delivery of Mental Health Programs: A Systematic Review , 2013, Journal of medical Internet research.

[29]  F. Hasson,et al.  Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. , 2000, Journal of advanced nursing.