MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401409582 · doi:10.2196/53805

Assessment of Eye Care Apps for Children and Adolescents Based on the Mobile App Rating Scale: Content Analysis and Quality Assessment

2024· article· en· W4401409582 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ming Liu, Xiaoqian Wu, Ziyu Li, Dongmei Tan, Cheng Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinopathy of Prematurity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMobile appsRating scaleScale (ratio)mHealthQuality (philosophy)App storePsychologyComputer scienceMedicineWorld Wide WebPsychological interventionPsychiatryDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In China, the current situation of myopia among children and adolescents is very serious. Prevention and control of myopia are inhibited by the lack of medical resources and the low awareness about eye care. Nevertheless, mobile apps provide an effective means to solve these problems. Since the health app market in China is still immature, it has become particularly important to conduct a study to assess the quality of eye-care apps to facilitate the development of better eye-care service strategies. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the quality, functionality, medical evidence, and professional background of eye-care apps targeting children and adolescents in the Chinese app stores. METHODS: A systematic search on iOS and Android app stores was performed to identify eye-care apps for children and adolescents. The general characteristics, development context, and functional features of the apps were described. Quality assessment of the apps was completed by 2 independent researchers using the Mobile App Rating Scale. RESULTS: This study included 29 apps, of which 17 (59%) were developed by commercial organizations and 12 (41%) had a design with relevant scientific basis. The main built-in functions of these apps include self-testing (18/29, 62%), eye exercises (16/29, 55%), and eye-care education (16/29, 55%). The mean overall quality of eye-care apps was 3.49 (SD 0.33), with a score ranging from 2.89 to 4.39. The overall Mobile App Rating Scale score exhibited a significant positive correlation with the subscale scores (r=0.81-0.91; P<.001). In addition, although most apps provided basic eye-care features, there are some deficiencies. For example, only a few apps were developed with the participation of medical organizations or professional ophthalmologists, and most of the apps were updated infrequently, failing to provide the latest eye-care information and technology in a timely manner. CONCLUSIONS: In general, the quality of eye-care apps for children and teenagers in Chinese app stores is good. These apps fulfill users' needs for eye-care services to a certain extent, but they still suffer from insufficient medical background, low user engagement, and untimely updates. In order to further improve the effectiveness of eye-care apps, cooperation with medical institutions and professional ophthalmologists should be strengthened to enhance the scientific and authoritative nature of the apps. At the same time, interactive features and regular updates should be added to enhance user participation and the continuity of the apps. This study provides a reference for future development or improvement of eye-care apps, which can help promote myopia prevention and control.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.371 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicRetinopathy of Prematurity StudiesFrench-language works237,207