A pictorial schema for a comprehensive user-oriented identification of medical Apps.

OBJECTIVES The huge amount of released medical apps prevents medical app users from believing that medical scientific societies and other accreditation bodies as well, have the resources and the power for assigning to any medical app a quality score. By the time being, any medical app user has to take the risks related to the frequently insufficient accreditation of that app. Providing clear user-oriented schemas, to be adopted both when putting a medical App on the market and when an App comes to be evaluated by a cohort or single users, becomes crucial. The aim of our research was to define a pictorial identification one-shot schema for a comprehensive user-oriented identification of medical apps. METHODS Adopting a pictorial approach is common in software design modeling. To build up our identification schema we started from the limited number of Apps already available on a web site of app reviews (iMedicalApps.com), and we identified an appropriately large set of attributes for describing medical apps. We arranged the attributes in six main families. We organized them in a one-shot comprehensive pictorial schema. We adopted a traffic light color code for assessing each attribute, that was sufficient to provide simple elements of alerts and alarms regarding a single App. Then, we considered apps from iMedicalApps.com web site belonging to three medical specialties: cardiology, oncology, and pharma and analyzed them according to the proposed pictorial schema. RESULTS A pictorial schema having the attributes grouped in the families related to "Responsible Promoters", "Offered Services", "Searching Methods", "Applications Domains", "Envisaged Users", and "Qualifiers and Quantifiers" has been identified. Furthermore, we produced a one-shot pictorial schema for each considered app, and for each medical specialty, we produced it also in an aggregated form. CONCLUSIONS The one-shot pictorial schema provides a useful perception of when and where to use a considered app. It fits positively the expectations of potential but different user's profiles. It can be a first step towards a systematic assessment of apps from the user viewpoint.

[1]  Célia Boyer,et al.  D8.1.1. Requirements for the general public health search , 2011 .

[2]  C. Eccleston,et al.  Smartphone applications for pain management , 2011, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[3]  N. Ahuja,et al.  The Smartphone in Medicine: A Review of Current and Potential Use Among Physicians and Students , 2012, Journal of medical Internet research.

[4]  Lindsey E. Dayer,et al.  Smartphone medication adherence apps: potential benefits to patients and providers. , 2013, Journal of the American Pharmacists Association : JAPhA.

[5]  C Boyer,et al.  The Health On the Net Code of Conduct for medical and health Websites , 1998, Comput. Biol. Medicine.

[6]  Ninghui Li,et al.  Using probabilistic generative models for ranking risks of Android apps , 2012, CCS.

[7]  Urs-Vito Albrecht,et al.  Standard Reporting for Medical Apps , 2013, ICIMTH.

[8]  Ronald Tamler,et al.  An evaluation of diabetes self-management applications for Android smartphones , 2012, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[9]  J. Wolf,et al.  Diagnostic inaccuracy of smartphone applications for melanoma detection. , 2013, JAMA dermatology.

[10]  Paul A. Fontelo,et al.  Evaluation of generic medical information accessed via mobile phones at the point of care in resource-limited settings , 2014, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[11]  S. Bonacina,et al.  A Comprehensive E-prescribing Model to Allow Representing, Comparing, and Analyzing Available Systems , 2013, Methods of Information in Medicine.

[12]  Jodi G. Daniel,et al.  A national action plan to support consumer engagement via e-health. , 2013, Health affairs.

[13]  Margaret McCartney,et al.  How do we know whether medical apps work? , 2013, BMJ.

[14]  Urs-Vito Albrecht,et al.  App-Synopsis - Standard Reporting for Medical Apps , 2013, MedInfo.

[15]  A. Hamilton,et al.  Smartphone apps in microbiology--is better regulation required? , 2012, Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases.

[16]  M. Gail,et al.  Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. , 1989, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[17]  Orrin I. Franko,et al.  Smartphone Apps for Orthopaedic Surgeons , 2011, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[18]  D Spiegelman,et al.  Validation of the Gail et al. model of breast cancer risk prediction and implications for chemoprevention. , 2001, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[19]  Amy J Barton,et al.  The regulation of mobile health applications , 2012, BMC Medicine.

[20]  Vittorio Zaccaria,et al.  How might the iPad change healthcare? , 2012, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[21]  Cecily Morrison,et al.  Apps for asthma self-management: a systematic assessment of content and tools , 2012, BMC Medicine.

[22]  T. L. Lewis,et al.  A Systematic Self-Certification Model for Mobile Medical Apps , 2013, Journal of medical Internet research.

[23]  Jon Cornwall,et al.  Evaluation of free i-applications for tertiary level gross anatomy education. , 2012, The Australasian medical journal.

[24]  Ngu Phuc Huy,et al.  Evaluation of mobile app paradigms , 2012, MoMM '12.