MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415389337 · doi:10.2196/72009

Mobile Apps for HIV and Sexually Transmitted Infection Prevention in Canada, Mexico, and the United States: Environmental Scan

2025· article· en· W4415389337 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Higinio Fernández‐Sánchez, Javier Salazar-Alberto, Jhan Carlos Manuel Fernández Delgado, Annalynn M. Galvin, Michael J. Mugavero, Carlos E. Rodríguez-Díaz, Diane Santa Maria

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)mHealthMobile appsMen who have sex with menSexually transmitted diseaseMobile deviceConfidentialityMobile phone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Canada, Mexico, and the United States are primary transit destinations for migrants in the Western Hemisphere. Migrants face barriers to accessing health services, including HIV/AIDS and STI prevention. Mobile apps may enhance public health access for these populations. OBJECTIVE: This study systematically identifies and evaluates mobile apps supporting HIV and STI prevention in Canada, Mexico, and the United States. METHODS: An environmental scan of 357 mobile applications from the Google Play and Apple App stores was conducted on June 18, 2024, following the rigorous six-step framework proposed by Fernández-Sánchez to ensure a systematic and comprehensive evaluation of apps for HIV and STI prevention. Predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, resulting in 6 eligible apps. Each app was assessed using the 29-item Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS), scored on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = inadequate, 5 = excellent), and categorized as high (3), medium (2), or low (1) based on mean scores. Internal consistency was excellent (Cronbach's α = 0.90), and inter-rater reliability demonstrated near-perfect agreement (Cohen's κ = 0.862). Data analysis was performed using SPSS version 27. RESULTS: All six apps were available in Canada, Mexico, and the United States, with 33.3% from Google Play, 16.7% from Apple, and 50.0% from both platforms. MARS evaluation revealed high quality ratings for Engagement (100%), Functionality (88.9%), Aesthetics (83.3%), and Interaction (83.0%), as well as high subjective quality (83.3%) and app-specific quality (88.9%). Life4Me+ was the highest-rated app (4.6; 3/5), while HIV-TEST received the lowest rating (3.4; 7/5). Most apps (83.3%) were only available in English, and 16.7% supported multiple languages, which may limit accessibility for non-English-speaking migrant populations. Additionally, 83.3% were updated in 2024, 33.3% were linked to non-governmental organization, 16.7% to a university, and 50.0% had no clear affiliation. Regarding their focus, 50.0% addressed STI prevention, diagnosis, and treatment, 16.7% combined HIV and STI prevention, and 33.3% provided PrEP-related resources. CONCLUSIONS: These six apps stand out for their high functionality, engagement, and accessibility, establishing themselves as effective tools for HIV and STI prevention education among migrant populations. This study highlights the critical role of digital resources in addressing public health challenges faced by vulnerable and minority groups. Integrating these apps into health promotion strategies is essential to improve health literacy and encourage preventive behaviors. Moreover, ensuring the quality, credibility, linguistic diversity, and continuous updating of these digital interventions is crucial to achieving a real and sustained impact on public health. Policies should promote clear standards that guarantee accessibility, transparency, and accuracy, thereby facilitating access to healthcare services in complex migratory contexts.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.260
Threshold uncertainty score0.522

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.009
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealth→Same topicMobile Health and mHealth Applications→French-language works237,207→