Abstract

BackgroundThere are thousands of apps promoting dietary improvement, increased physical activity (PA) and weight management. Despite a growing number of reviews in this area, popular apps have not been comprehensively analysed in terms of features related to engagement, functionality, aesthetics, information quality, and content, including the types of change techniques employed.MethodsThe databases containing information about all Health and Fitness apps on GP and iTunes (7,954 and 25,491 apps) were downloaded in April 2015. Database filters were applied to select the most popular apps available in both stores. Two researchers screened the descriptions selecting only weight management apps. Features, app quality and content were independently assessed using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) and previously-defined categories of techniques relevant to behaviour change. Inter-coder reliabilities were calculated, and correlations between features explored.ResultsOf the 23 popular apps included in the review 16 were free (70 %), 15 (65 %) addressed weight control, diet and PA combined; 19 (83 %) allowed behavioural tracking. On 5-point MARS scales, apps were of average quality (Md = 3.2, IQR = 1.4); “functionality” (Md = 4.0, IQR = 1.1) was the highest and “information quality” (Md = 2.0, IQR = 1.1) was the lowest domain. On average, 10 techniques were identified per app (range: 1–17) and of the 34 categories applied, goal setting and self-monitoring techniques were most frequently identified. App quality was positively correlated with number of techniques included (rho = .58, p < .01) and number of “technical” features (rho = .48, p < .05), which was also associated with the number of techniques included (rho = .61, p < .01). Apps that provided tracking used significantly more techniques than those that did not. Apps with automated tracking scored significantly higher in engagement, aesthetics, and overall MARS scores. Those that used change techniques previously associated with effectiveness (i.e., goal setting, self-monitoring and feedback) also had better “information quality”.ConclusionsPopular apps assessed have overall moderate quality and include behavioural tracking features and a range of change techniques associated with behaviour change. These apps may influence behaviour, although more attention to information quality and evidence-based content are warranted to improve their quality.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12966-016-0359-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Highlights

  • There are thousands of apps promoting dietary improvement, increased physical activity (PA) and weight management

  • Popular apps assessed have overall moderate quality and include behavioural tracking features and a range of change techniques associated with behaviour change

  • The aim of this study was to evaluate both the quality and content of popular weight management apps available from both iTunes and Google Play (GP), to answer the following research questions: (1) What is the overall quality of these apps in terms of engagement, functionality, aesthetics, and information quality? (2) What type of change techniques are included in these apps? (3) What are the relationships between user ratings, app quality, other app features, and techniques included, techniques previously found to be associated with weight loss?

Read more

Summary

Introduction

There are thousands of apps promoting dietary improvement, increased physical activity (PA) and weight management. In our recent systematic scoping review of literature on mobile phone and Web 2.0 technologies for weight management [4], we identified 20 reviews and content analyses of apps [5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24] The majority of these (14/20, 70 %) assessed the presence of theoretical components [5,6,7,8,9, 11, 13, 14, 16, 18, 21,22,23]; the remainder focused either on evaluating the apps’ design and usability qualities [12, 19, 20, 24], or technical functionalities (e.g., behavioural tracking) [10, 17]. A comprehensive evaluation of the quality of such apps and whether there are relationships between these aspects is lacking

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.