Nutrition-Related Mobile Apps in the Spanish App Stores: Quality and Content Analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Mobile apps represent accessible and cost-effective tools to improve nutrition and prevent chronic diseases. However, most of these apps have been characterized as having limited functionality, raising concerns about their effectiveness, acceptability, and efficacy. Objective: The aims of the study were to assess the quality of popular nutrition-related app platforms in Spain and to describe their characteristics and functionalities. Methods: We screened apps providing information on dietary advice, food advice, and nutritional content in the Apple App Store and Google Play Store in Spain from March 2 to March 16, 2024. Apps with a star rating of ≥4 (of 5 stars), those available in Spanish, those that were free of charge, those last updated after January 2022, those with >500 reviews, and those with >500,000 downloads were included. The quality of apps was assessed using the user version of the Mobile App Rating Scale (uMARS). General characteristics and nutritional, health, and market-related functionalities of the nutrition-related apps were described. Correlations among total and uMARS sections, star ratings, and number of reviews and downloads were evaluated. Results: Among the 1460 apps identified in the search, 42 apps met the criteria. The majority of these (n=20, 48%) aimed at recording and analyzing food intake, followed by those providing nutritional plans or diets (n=9, 21%), advising on healthy habits (n=7, 17%), and offering recipes (n=6, 14%). The most prevalent nutritional functionalities offered were recording and monitoring body measurements (n=30, 71%), food tracking (n=26, 62%), and dietary analysis (n=25, 60%), whereas nutrition education was less common (n=16, 38%). Among market-related functionalities, advertisements were the most common among the study apps (n=30, 71%), followed by the option of sharing on social media (n=29, 69%) and customizable reminders (n=26, 62%). Sharing the recorded information in the app with health professionals was infrequent (n=1, 2%). The mean (SD) total uMARS score (maximum 5 points) was 3.78 (0.35), while the mean (SD) uMARS scores for functionality, aesthetics, engagement, and information were 4.21 (0.38), 3.94 (0.54), 3.51 (0.46), and 3.48 (0.44), respectively. Lower mean scores were observed for the subjective quality (mean 2.65, SD 0.56) and perceived impact (mean 3.06, SD 0.67). Moderate to strong positive significant correlations were mostly observed between total uMARS and section-specific uMARS scores, while the correlations between the uMARS section scores were mostly moderate positive. Total uMARS scores were very weakly correlated with user rating, number of reviews, and number of downloads. Conclusions: The quality of popular nutrition-related app platforms in Spain was acceptable, with observed remarkable differences between sections. The majority of the apps were appealing due to their user-friendly interfaces. Only a few apps, however, provided dietary structure analysis or nutritional education. Further research is needed to assess the long-term impact of these apps on users.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,014 | 0,047 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,013 | 0,009 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».