MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408220420 · doi:10.2196/56862

Purposes of Smartphone Health Care Apps and the Practicality of Their Functions in Disaster Situations: Qualitative Function Assessment Study

2025· article· en· W4408220420 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sayuri Nonaka, Susumu Fujii, Kosuke Yamada

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFunction (biology)Health careQualitative researchComputer sciencePsychologyHuman–computer interactionSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Japan has experienced various natural disasters, including the Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011. It becomes crucial to focus on strengthening self-help measures through health care apps that are used in normal times to help people during disasters. However, little is known about what health care apps would be useful in times of disaster. Objective: This study aimed to investigate the prevalent functionalities and purposes of using health care apps during normalcy, explore their potential utility, and propose strategies for disaster response through their utilization. Methods: We focus on highly ranked health care apps (within the top 100 in the health care category for iPhones by Apple, Inc for a certain period) and reclassify their purpose of use, such as sleep, relaxation, and exercise, in detail. We also investigate the functions within each health care app (measurement, recording, advice, content provision, and guidance to actual services), based on which we determine their potential utilization during disasters and anticipate potential solutions to address disaster-related challenges. We also consider the ideal framework of health care apps in disaster response, exploring possibilities such as the necessity of new disaster-specific apps or the adaptation of existing health care apps for disaster scenarios. Results: Among the 70 free apps, the predominant functions included "recording" (n=60 cases, 86%) and "measurement" (n=47 cases, 67%), primarily encompassing the mechanical functions of wearable devices and smartphones. A similar trend was seen in the 77 paid apps, but "content provision" (n=54 cases, 70%) was the most prevalent. Furthermore, the "content provision" function was particularly common in the "purposes of use" categories "sleep" (χ211=29; P<.001), "relaxation" (χ211=14.6; P<.001), and "exercise" (χ211=9.3; P=.002). This suggested the possibility of using the content provision function in existing health care apps to support mental and physical health even during a disaster. Conclusions: The widespread use of apps during normal times could minimize hesitation in adopting them during disasters. The findings emphasize the potential for augmenting disaster-specific content within existing apps rather than developing new ones. This approach aligns with the likelihood of preinstalled app use during emergencies, indicating a pragmatic strategy for enhancing disaster response content within prevalent 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.604
Teacher spread0.446 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicDisaster Response and ManagementFrench-language works237,207