Evaluation of Chinese HIV Mobile Apps by Researchers and Patients With HIV: Quality Evaluation Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Against the backdrop of globalization, China remains one of the most heavily burdened countries in Asia with regard to AIDS. However, many high-risk groups and patients affected by AIDS may be less likely to actively seek care from medical institutions because of fear of experiencing shame or discrimination. Mobile apps provide a promising avenue for supporting the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of AIDS. However, a comprehensive systematic evaluation of these mobile apps’ functionality and quality has not been conducted yet. Objective This study aims to identify the available mobile apps for AIDS in China, assess and discuss the functional features and quality of these Chinese AIDS mobile apps, and offer decision support for patients and clinical practitioners in accessing high-quality AIDS mobile apps. Furthermore, based on the evaluation results, recommendations for improvement will be provided. Methods A systematic search was conducted on the Qimai app data platform, the Aladdin WeChat applet data platform, and WeChat to identify mobile apps related to AIDS. A snowball sampling method was used to supplement the potentially overlooked apps. The selected mobile apps underwent a rigorous screening process based on unified criteria. Subsequently, assessments were independently undertaken by 3 separate researchers and 2 patients with HIV, using both the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) and the User Mobile App Rating Scale (uMARS). Quantitative interpretations of the data were facilitated by the MedCalc statistical software (version 20.217, MedCalc Software). Results A total of 2901 AIDS mobile apps were included in the study, with 2897 identified through information retrieval and an additional 4 added via snowball sampling. After a rigorous selection process, 21 apps were determined to be usable. Among them, the Hong Feng Wan app achieved the highest combined average score, calculated based on the MARS (3.96, SD 0.33) and uMARS (4.47, SD 0.26). Overall, there was no significant correlation between MARS and uMARS (rapp quality total score=0.41; P=.07; rsubjective quality=0.39; P=.08). A notable issue was the widespread lack of user privacy protection, with only 24% (5/21) of the apps offering this feature. Conclusions The number of available Chinese AIDS mobile apps is limited, with WeChat applets dominating the market. Nonetheless, the performance of WeChat mini-apps is generally inferior to that of independent apps, and there may be significant discrepancies between assessments conducted by researchers and those provided by genuine end users, emphasizing the necessity of involving real users in the development and evaluation of HIV mobile apps. In addition, developers of these Chinese HIV mobile apps need to devote attention to improving privacy protection mechanisms, in addition to considering the evaluations of researchers and real users. This will help attract more users and increase user loyalty.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.150 | 0.207 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".