Digital Storytelling for People With Cognitive Impairment Using Available Mobile Apps: Systematic Search in App Stores and Content Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Growing evidence suggests cognitive and social health benefits can be derived from digital storytelling for older adults with cognitive impairment. Digital storytelling apps offer the potential to serve as an on-demand, easy-to-access platform for enhancing cognitive abilities and promoting social well-being. Yet, despite the increasing quantity of such apps being available on the market, there is a gap in research investigating their quality. OBJECTIVE: This app review aims to assess the digital storytelling apps available in the Chinese market and evaluate them in accordance with the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS). The goal was to identify key features and evaluate the overall quality in the context of cognitively impaired users. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in both the Google Play store (Google LLC) and iTunes store (Apple Inc), using English and Chinese keywords. Apps were chosen according to specific criteria that included features, including (but not limited to) memory capture, story saving, cue-based reminiscing, and the ability to share stories or memories with others. The MARS was used by 3 individual researchers to independently assess app quality across several domains, such as engagement, functionality, aesthetics, and information quality, for both Android and iOS apps. RESULTS: From an initial screening of 297 apps, only 9 (3%) met the criteria for detailed evaluation using MARS. The reviewed apps featured capture memory, save, reminisce, and share functions, which are critical in supporting cognitive functions and enhancing user engagement. The analysis revealed patterns in platform diversity and geographical distribution of developers, with apps available on both iOS and Android. Memoirs of Life and Memorize: Diaries, Memories, Notes, Ideas, Timelines, Categories (Fair Apps Mobile) had the highest mean MARS scores of 3.35, indicating strong engagement, functionality, and information quality, while the lowest score was 2.33. The overall mean score across all apps was only 3.03 (SD 0.60), highlighting significant variation, particularly in information quality. User feedback also showed considerable variability, ranging from 0 comments for apps such as Grand Storyteller (VarIT Inc) and PWI Storyteller (Project World Impact, LLC) to as many as 5361 comments for FamilySearch, which received extensive positive reviews. This wide range of user feedback underscores the importance of continuous improvement and user-centered design, particularly in enhancing information quality and content accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: The systematic search and evaluation highlight the diverse capabilities yet variable quality of digital storytelling apps available within the Chinese market, reflecting user experiences, satisfaction levels, and efficacy in supporting cognitively impaired users. While some apps excel in engagement and functionality, others need significant improvements in information quality and user interface design to better serve those with cognitive impairments. Future research is recommended to investigate regional limitations and features that would result in more inclusive and effective digital storytelling apps.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".