[The pathophysiology of hypercalcemia].

K. Kurokawa

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Promoting Health via mHealth Applications Using a French Version of the Mobile App Rating Scale: Adaptation and Validation Study

Ina Saliasi,Prescilla Martinon,Emily Darlington,Colette Smentek,Delphine Tardivo,Denis Bourgeois,Claude Dussart,Florence Carrouel,Laurie Fraticelli

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/30480

2024-06-27

Abstract:Background In the recent decades, the number of apps promoting health behaviors and health-related strategies and interventions has increased alongside the number of smartphone users. Nevertheless, the validity process for measuring and reporting app quality remains unsatisfactory for health professionals and end users and represents a public health concern. The Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) is a tool validated and widely used in the scientific literature to evaluate and compare mHealth app functionalities. However, MARS is not adapted to the French culture nor to the language. Objective This study aims to translate, adapt, and validate the equivalent French version of MARS (ie, MARS-F). Methods The original MARS was first translated to French by two independent bilingual scientists, and their common version was blind back-translated twice by two native English speakers, culminating in a final well-established MARS-F. Its comprehensibility was then evaluated by 6 individuals (3 researchers and 3 nonacademics), and the final MARS-F version was created. Two bilingual raters independently completed the evaluation of 63 apps using MARS and MARS-F. Interrater reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients. In addition, internal consistency and validity of both scales were assessed. Mokken scale analysis was used to investigate the scalability of both MARS and MARS-F. Results MARS-F had a good alignment with the original MARS, with properties comparable between the two scales. The correlation coefficients (r) between the corresponding dimensions of MARS and MARS-F ranged from 0.97 to 0.99. The internal consistencies of the MARS-F dimensions engagement ($\omega$=0.79), functionality ($\omega$=0.79), esthetics ($\omega$=0.78), and information quality ($\omega$=0.61) were acceptable and that for the overall MARS score ($\omega$=0.86) was good. Mokken scale analysis revealed a strong scalability for MARS (Loevinger H=0.37) and a good scalability for MARS-F (H=0.35). Conclusions MARS-F is a valid tool, and it would serve as a crucial aid for researchers, health care professionals, public health authorities, and interested third parties, to assess the quality of mHealth apps in French-speaking countries.

Computers and Society
The Arabic Version of the Mobile App Rating Scale: Development and Validation Study

Marco Bardus,Nathalie Awada,Lilian A Ghandour,Elie-Jacques Fares,Tarek Gherbal,Tasnim Al-Zanati,Stoyan R Stoyanov

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/16956

2020-03-03

Abstract:Background: With thousands of health apps in app stores globally, it is crucial to systemically and thoroughly evaluate the quality of these apps due to their potential influence on health decisions and outcomes. The Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) is the only currently available tool that provides a comprehensive, multidimensional evaluation of app quality, which has been used to compare medical apps from American and European app stores in various areas, available in English, Italian, Spanish, and German. However, this tool is not available in Arabic. Objective: This study aimed to translate and adapt MARS to Arabic and validate the tool with a sample of health apps aimed at managing or preventing obesity and associated disorders. Methods: We followed a well-established and defined "universalist" process of cross-cultural adaptation using a mixed methods approach. Early translations of the tool, accompanied by confirmation of the contents by two rounds of separate discussions, were included and culminated in a final version, which was then back-translated into English. Two trained researchers piloted the MARS in Arabic (MARS-Ar) with a sample of 10 weight management apps obtained from Google Play and the App Store. Interrater reliability was established using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). After reliability was ascertained, the two researchers independently evaluated a set of additional 56 apps. Results: MARS-Ar was highly aligned with the original English version. The ICCs for MARS-Ar (0.836, 95% CI 0.817-0.853) and MARS English (0.838, 95% CI 0.819-0.855) were good. The MARS-Ar subscales were highly correlated with the original counterparts (P<.001). The lowest correlation was observed in the area of usability (r=0.685), followed by aesthetics (r=0.827), information quality (r=0.854), engagement (r=0.894), and total app quality (r=0.897). Subjective quality was also highly correlated (r=0.820). Conclusions: MARS-Ar is a valid instrument to assess app quality among trained Arabic-speaking users of health and fitness apps. Researchers and public health professionals in the Arab world can use the overall MARS score and its subscales to reliably evaluate the quality of weight management apps. Further research is necessary to test the MARS-Ar on apps addressing various health issues, such as attention or anxiety prevention, or sexual and reproductive health.
The German Version of the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS-G): Development and Validation Study

Eva-Maria Messner,Yannik Terhorst,Antonia Barke,Harald Baumeister,Stoyan Stoyanov,Leanne Hides,David Kavanagh,Rüdiger Pryss,Lasse Sander,Thomas Probst

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/14479

2020-03-27

JMIR mhealth and uhealth

Abstract:Background The number of mobile health apps (MHAs), which are developed to promote healthy behaviors, prevent disease onset, manage and cure diseases, or assist with rehabilitation measures, has exploded. App store star ratings and descriptions usually provide insufficient or even false information about app quality, although they are popular among end users. A rigorous systematic approach to establish and evaluate the quality of MHAs is urgently needed. The Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) is an assessment tool that facilitates the objective and systematic evaluation of the quality of MHAs. However, a German MARS is currently not available. Objective The aim of this study was to translate and validate a German version of the MARS (MARS-G). Methods The original 19-item MARS was forward and backward translated twice, and the MARS-G was created. App description items were extended, and 104 MHAs were rated twice by eight independent bilingual researchers, using the MARS-G and MARS. The internal consistency, validity, and reliability of both scales were assessed. Mokken scale analysis was used to investigate the scalability of the overall scores. Results The retranslated scale showed excellent alignment with the original MARS. Additionally, the properties of the MARS-G were comparable to those of the original MARS. The internal consistency was good for all subscales (ie, omega ranged from 0.72 to 0.91). The correlation coefficients (r) between the dimensions of the MARS-G and MARS ranged from 0.93 to 0.98. The scalability of the MARS (H=0.50) and MARS-G (H=0.48) were good. Conclusions The MARS-G is a reliable and valid tool for experts and stakeholders to assess the quality of health apps in German-speaking populations. The overall score is a reliable quality indicator. However, further studies are needed to assess the factorial structure of the MARS and MARS-G.

health care sciences & services,medical informatics
Validation of the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS)

Yannik Terhorst,Paula Philippi,Lasse B. Sander,Dana Schultchen,Sarah Paganini,Marco Bardus,Karla Santo,Johannes Knitza,Gustavo C. Machado,Stephanie Schoeppe,Natalie Bauereiß,Alexandra Portenhauser,Matthias Domhardt,Benjamin Walter,Martin Krusche,Harald Baumeister,Eva-Maria Messner

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241480

IF: 3.7

2020-11-02

PLoS ONE

Abstract:Mobile health apps (MHA) have the potential to improve health care. The commercial MHA market is rapidly growing, but the content and quality of available MHA are unknown. Instruments for the assessment of the quality and content of MHA are highly needed. The Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) is one of the most widely used tools to evaluate the quality of MHA. Only few validation studies investigated its metric quality. No study has evaluated the construct validity and concurrent validity.This study evaluates the construct validity, concurrent validity, reliability, and objectivity, of the MARS.Data was pooled from 15 international app quality reviews to evaluate the metric properties of the MARS. The MARS measures app quality across four dimensions: engagement, functionality, aesthetics and information quality. Construct validity was evaluated by assessing related competing confirmatory models by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Non-centrality (RMSEA), incremental (CFI, TLI) and residual (SRMR) fit indices were used to evaluate the goodness of fit. As a measure of concurrent validity, the correlations to another quality assessment tool (ENLIGHT) were investigated. Reliability was determined using Omega. Objectivity was assessed by intra-class correlation.In total, MARS ratings from 1,299 MHA covering 15 different health domains were included. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed a bifactor model with a general factor and a factor for each dimension (RMSEA = 0.074, TLI = 0.922, CFI = 0.940, SRMR = 0.059). Reliability was good to excellent (Omega 0.79 to 0.93). Objectivity was high (ICC = 0.82). MARS correlated with ENLIGHT (ps<.05).The metric evaluation of the MARS demonstrated its suitability for the quality assessment. As such, the MARS could be used to make the quality of MHA transparent to health care stakeholders and patients. Future studies could extend the present findings by investigating the re-test reliability and predictive validity of the MARS.

multidisciplinary sciences
Mobile App Rating Scale: A New Tool for Assessing the Quality of Health Mobile Apps

Stoyan R Stoyanov,Leanne Hides,David J Kavanagh,Oksana Zelenko,Dian Tjondronegoro,Madhavan Mani

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.3422

2015-03-11

JMIR mhealth and uhealth

Abstract:BACKGROUND: The use of mobile apps for health and well being promotion has grown exponentially in recent years. Yet, there is currently no app-quality assessment tool beyond "star"-ratings.OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to develop a reliable, multidimensional measure for trialling, classifying, and rating the quality of mobile health apps.METHODS: A literature search was conducted to identify articles containing explicit Web or app quality rating criteria published between January 2000 and January 2013. Existing criteria for the assessment of app quality were categorized by an expert panel to develop the new Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) subscales, items, descriptors, and anchors. There were sixty well being apps that were randomly selected using an iTunes search for MARS rating. There were ten that were used to pilot the rating procedure, and the remaining 50 provided data on interrater reliability.RESULTS: There were 372 explicit criteria for assessing Web or app quality that were extracted from 25 published papers, conference proceedings, and Internet resources. There were five broad categories of criteria that were identified including four objective quality scales: engagement, functionality, aesthetics, and information quality; and one subjective quality scale; which were refined into the 23-item MARS. The MARS demonstrated excellent internal consistency (alpha = .90) and interrater reliability intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC = .79).CONCLUSIONS: The MARS is a simple, objective, and reliable tool for classifying and assessing the quality of mobile health apps. It can also be used to provide a checklist for the design and development of new high quality health apps.

health care sciences & services,medical informatics
Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric validation of a Spanish version of the Maryland Assessment of Recovery Scale (MARS-12)

Nekane Balluerka,Arantxa Gorostiaga,Hernán María Sampietro,Ana González-Pinto,Jone Aliri

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0298554

IF: 3.7

2024-02-23

PLoS ONE

Abstract:The aim of this study was to adapt and validate a Spanish version of the Maryland Assessment of Recovery Scale (MARS-12). It was carried out in strict accordance with internationally recognized guidelines for test adaptation. A preliminary Spanish version of the MARS-12 was first produced through a standardized translation/back-translation process, ensuring semantic, linguistic, and contextual equivalence with respect to the original scale. Its psychometric properties were then examined in a sample of 325 people with serious mental illness recruited from six different provinces in the Basque Country (northern Spain) and Catalonia (north-eastern Spain). They were users of a total of 20 community rehabilitation and psychiatry services. Confirmatory factor analysis supported a unidimensional structure, consistent with the original scale. Scores on the MARS-12 were positively correlated (.83) with scores on the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery, supporting convergent validity, while validity evidence based on relationships with other variables was provided by positive correlations between MARS-12 scores and scores on the Dispositional Hope Scale (.82) and on the three dimensions of the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (range .30 to .41). Reliability of MARS-12 scores was high (McDonald’s ω = .97), as was temporal stability across a one-week interval (.89). The Spanish version of the MARS-12 is a valid and reliable scale that may be used by mental health professionals to assess recovery among Spanish people with serious mental illness.

multidisciplinary sciences
Spanish Version of the System Usability Scale for the Assessment of Electronic Tools: Development and Validation

Magdalena Del Rocio Sevilla-Gonzalez,Lizbeth Moreno Loaeza,Laura Sofia Lazaro-Carrera,Brigette Bourguet Ramirez,Anabel Vázquez Rodríguez,María Luisa Peralta-Pedrero,Paloma Almeda-Valdes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/21161

2020-12-16

JMIR Human Factors

Abstract:Background The System Usability Scale (SUS) is a common metric used to assess the usability of a system, and it was initially developed in English. The implementation of electronic systems for clinical counseling (eHealth and mobile health) is increasing worldwide. Therefore, tools are needed to evaluate these applications in the languages and regional contexts in which the electronic tools are developed. Objective This study aims to translate, culturally adapt, and validate the original English version of the SUS into a Spanish version. Methods The translation process included forward and backward translation. Forward translations were made by 2 native Spanish speakers who spoke English as their second language, and a backward translation was made by a native English speaker. The Spanish SUS questionnaire was validated by 10 experts in mobile app development. The face validity of the questionnaire was tested with 10 mobile phone users, and the reliability testing was conducted among 88 electronic application users. Results The content validity index of the new Spanish SUS was good, as indicated by a rating of 0.92 for the relevance of the items. The questionnaire was easy to understand, based on a face validity index of 0.94. The Cronbach α was .812 (95% CI 0.748-0.866; P<.001). Conclusions The new Spanish SUS questionnaire is a valid and reliable tool to assess the usability of electronic tools among Spanish-speaking users.
Insights into the Quality of Mobile Health Apps: Preliminary Results of an Analysis of MARS Scores

Hendrik Lef,Walter Swoboda,Johannes Schobel,Daniel Hieber,Felix Holl

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/SHTI240438

2024-08-22

Abstract:Many mHelath applications have been developed, and the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) is a common tool for assessing them. This study aims to provide mean values for MARS scores found in recent literature. We systematically searched for literature in which MARS was used and analyzed them. MARS values for 5,920 applications from 215 studies were compiled. The mean MARS Quality Score is 3.51. The highest average score was achieved in the Functionality category (3.98), followed by Aesthetics (3.52), Information (3.33), Engagement (3.18) and Subjective (2.72). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to calculate average values for the five categories of the MARS and the MARS score based on such an extensive collection of data. The study shows that the overall quality of the applications is above the average value of 2.5.
[Serum cytokine profiling of prostate cancer and benign prostatic hyperplasia using recombinant antibody microarray].

Lei Zhang,Sheng-kun Sun,Li-xin Shi,Xu Zhang

2010-07-01

Abstract:OBJECTIVE To identify the differential expressions of serum cytokines between prostate cancer (PCa) and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), and provide proteomic evidence for the early diagnosis of PCa. METHODS We used human cytokine array to determine the profiles of the serum cytokines obtained from 6 PCa and 6 BPH patients with the PSA level within the grey scale of 4 - 10 ng/ml. RESULTS We identified 19 differentially expressed cytokines in the PCa patients, 16 obviously up-regulated, including IL-3, IL-6 and IL-16, and 3 markedly down-regulated, which were Fas/TNFRSF6, TRALR-3 and IGFBP-6. Most of them were involved in such cellular bioprocesses as transcription, proliferation, signal transduction, and apoptosis. CONCLUSION The cytokine antibody assay permits simultaneous measurement of multiple markers in a small volume of serum, and can identify a panel of key cytokines related to the malignant biological behavior of cancer cells. And it helps to find the biomarkers for the early diagnosis, efficacy assessment and prognosis of prostate cancer.
Polyamines in normal and cataractous human lenses: evidence for post-translational modification.

L. Kremzner,D. Roy,A. Spector

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-4835(83)90139-2

IF: 3.77

1983-12-01

Experimental Eye Research

Abstract:
Adaptation and Validation of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire for Spanish Adolescents

Adrián Segura-Robles,Antonio-José Moreno-Guerrero,María-Elena Parra-González,Jesús López-Belmonte

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe11010012

2021-02-13

Abstract:This work adapts and validates the scale of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ), which is used to measure motivation. For this, an instrumental design was carried out with the purpose of analyzing the psychometric properties of the instrument. The sample consisted of 307 participants enrolled in compulsory secondary education. Reliability with fit indices were good in model B (proposed) with composite reliability, global reliability index, and Cronbach’s alpha. The original model (A) presented small problems that had to be adjusted when carrying out the translation. We concluded that adaptation and subsequent validation of the MSLQ instrument into a Spanish context was positive. In this sense, adequate adjustment rates have been achieved. However, in its contextual adequacy, the need arises to modify the presentation of the items alluding to intrinsic motivation due to the difficulty of measuring such a construct. Among the implications reached in this study is the possibility of having a validated instrument for the Spanish adolescent context to measure motivation on educational aspects. Furthermore, this tool can serve as the basis for the design of other instruments that measure this construct in other age ranges.
Assessing the Quality of Mobile Exercise Apps Based on the American College of Sports Medicine Guidelines: A Reliable and Valid Scoring Instrument.

Yi Guo,Jiang Bian,Trevor Leavitt,Heather K. Vincent,Lindsey Vander Zalm,Tyler L. Teurlings,Megan D. Smith,Francois Modave

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6976

IF: 7.076

2017-01-01

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract:BACKGROUND:Regular physical activity can not only help with weight management, but also lower cardiovascular risks, cancer rates, and chronic disease burden. Yet, only approximately 20% of Americans currently meet the physical activity guidelines recommended by the US Department of Health and Human Services. With the rapid development of mobile technologies, mobile apps have the potential to improve participation rates in exercise programs, particularly if they are evidence-based and are of sufficient content quality.OBJECTIVE:The goal of this study was to develop and test an instrument, which was designed to score the content quality of exercise program apps with respect to the exercise guidelines set forth by the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM).METHODS:We conducted two focus groups (N=14) to elicit input for developing a preliminary 27-item scoring instruments based on the ACSM exercise prescription guidelines. Three reviewers who were no sports medicine experts independently scored 28 exercise program apps using the instrument. Inter- and intra-rater reliability was assessed among the 3 reviewers. An expert reviewer, a Fellow of the ACSM, also scored the 28 apps to create criterion scores. Criterion validity was assessed by comparing nonexpert reviewers' scores to the criterion scores.RESULTS:Overall, inter- and intra-rater reliability was high with most coefficients being greater than .7. Inter-rater reliability coefficients ranged from .59 to .99, and intra-rater reliability coefficients ranged from .47 to 1.00. All reliability coefficients were statistically significant. Criterion validity was found to be excellent, with the weighted kappa statistics ranging from .67 to .99, indicating a substantial agreement between the scores of expert and nonexpert reviewers. Finally, all apps scored poorly against the ACSM exercise prescription guidelines. None of the apps received a score greater than 35, out of a possible maximal score of 70.CONCLUSIONS:We have developed and presented valid and reliable scoring instruments for exercise program apps. Our instrument may be useful for consumers and health care providers who are looking for apps that provide safe, progressive general exercise programs for health and fitness.
Quality Assessment of Smartphone Medication Management Apps in France: Systematic Search

Mickael Toïgo,Julie Marc,Maurice Hayot,Lionel Moulis,Francois Carbonnel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/54866

2024-03-20

JMIR mhealth and uhealth

Abstract:Background: Adherence to medication is estimated to be around 50% for chronically ill patients in high-income countries. Improving the effectiveness of adherence interventions could have a far greater impact on population health than any improvement in specific medical treatments. Mobile health (mHealth) is one of the most effective solutions for helping patients improve their medication intake, notably through the use of mobile apps with reminder systems. With more than 327,000 apps available in the mHealth field, it is difficult for health care professionals and patients alike to choose which apps to recommend and use. Objective: We aim to carry out a systematic search of medication management smartphone apps available in France that send reminders to patients and assess their quality using a validated scale. Methods: Mobile apps were identified in October and November 2022 after a systematic keyword search on the 2 main app download platforms: App Store (Apple Inc) and Google Play Store. Inclusion criteria were free availability, date of last update, and availability in French. Next, 2 health care professionals independently evaluated the included apps using the French version of the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS-F), an objective scoring system validated for assessing the overall quality of apps in the mHealth field. An intraclass correlation coefficient was calculated to determine interrater reliability. Results: In total, 960 apps were identified and 49 were selected (25 from the App Store and 24 from the Google Play Store). Interrater reliability was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.92; 95% CI 0.87-0.95; P <.001). The average MARS-F score was 3.56 (SD 0.49) for apps on the App Store and 3.51 (SD 0.46) for those on the Google Play Store, with 10 apps scoring above 4 out of 5. Further, 2 apps were tested in at least one randomized controlled trial and showed positive results. The 2 apps with the highest ratings were Mediteo rappel de médicaments (Mediteo GmbH) and TOM rappel medicaments, pilule (Innovation6 GmbH), available on both platforms. Each app's MARS-F score was weakly correlated with user ratings on the App Store and moderately correlated on the Google Play Store. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first study that used a validated scoring system to evaluate medication management apps that send medication reminders. The quality of the apps was heterogeneous, with only 2 having been studied in a randomized controlled trial with positive results. The evaluation of apps in real-life conditions by patients is necessary to determine their acceptability and effectiveness. Certification of apps is also essential to help health care professionals and patients identify validated apps.

health care sciences & services,medical informatics
Validation of the Spanish version of the Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale (BSMAS) among Spanish adolescents

Arrivillaga, Christiane

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-06728-5

IF: 2.8

2024-09-26

Current Psychology

Abstract:Problematic social media use (PSMU) has become an increasingly researched area in the general population, specifically among adolescents. Due to its association with poor well-being and negative consequences, it is important to have assessment instruments that are valid and reliable in evaluating PSMU. The Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale (BSMAS) is the most widely used scale to assess PSMU. The present study analyzed the psychometric properties of a Spanish version of the BSMAS among Spanish adolescents. The sample comprised 688 adolescents from Spain (54% girls), aged 12 to 18 years ( M = 14.23 years) who completed a number of self-report questions and psychometric scales. The reliability, construct validity, concurrent validity, and criterion validity of the BSMAS were evaluated. Additionally, the measurement invariance by gender and age group was also calculated. The results indicated good reliability indices ( coefficients' range = 0.75–0.83). Moreover, PSMU was positively associated with problematic smartphone use, frequency of social networking site use, depression, anxiety, and loneliness and negatively associated with self-esteem and flourishing ( r range = -0.16–0.65). Furthermore, configural, metric, and scalar invariance was established among boys and girls, and younger and older adolescents. The study provides preliminary evidence indicating that the Spanish BSMAS is a reliable and valid instrument to assess PSMU among Spanish-speaking adolescents.

psychology, multidisciplinary
Ancestry-related differences in gene expression: findings may enhance understanding of health disparities between populations.

Wei Zhang,M. E. Dolan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2217/14622416.9.5.489

2008-05-09

Abstract:The unveiling of the first human genome draft sequences almost 7 years ago [1,2] marked the begining of the postgenomic era. However, because of the existence of huge genetic variations, such as those in the form of SNPs [3] and copy-number variations (CNVs) [4], there is still much to be discovered. In recent years, functional studies have revealed that natural genetic variation plays a role in complex human traits, such as risks of common diseases [5], for example, asthma, stroke, heart attack, diabetes and cancer, and variability in drug response [6-8]. The importance of genetic variation in the human genome has increasingly attracted researchers' efforts in the past few years, leading to its selection as the Breakthrough of the Year in 2007 by Science [9].
Assessing Apps for Patients with Genitourinary Tumors Using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS): Systematic Search in App Stores and Content Analysis

Miguel Ángel Amor-García,Roberto Collado-Borrell,Vicente Escudero-Vilaplana,Alejandra Melgarejo-Ortuño,Ana Herranz-Alonso,José Ángel Arranz Arija,María Sanjurjo-Sáez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/17609

2020-07-23

JMIR mhealth and uhealth

Abstract:Background The large number of available cancer apps and their impact on the population necessitates a transparent, objective, and comprehensive evaluation by app experts, health care professionals, and users. To date, there have been no analyses or classifications of apps for patients with genitourinary cancers, which are among the most prevalent types of cancer. Objective The objective of our study was to analyze the quality of apps for patients diagnosed with genitourinary cancers using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) and identify high-quality apps. Methods We performed an observational cross-sectional descriptive study of all smartphone apps for patients diagnosed with genitourinary cancers available on iOS and Android platforms. In July 2019, we searched for all available apps for patients with genitourinary cancers (bladder, prostate, cervical, uterine, endometrial, kidney, testicular, and vulvar) or their caregivers. Apps were downloaded and evaluated, and the general characteristics were entered into a database. The evaluation was performed by 2 independent researchers using the MARS questionnaire, which rates 23 evaluation criteria clustered in 5 domains (Engagement, Functionality, Esthetics, Information, and Subjective Quality) on a scale from 1 to 5. Results In total, 46 apps were analyzed. Of these, 31 (67%) were available on Android, 6 (13%) on iOS, and 9 (20%) on both platforms. The apps were free in 89% of cases (41/46), and 61% (28/46) had been updated in the previous year. The apps were intended for prostate cancer in 30% of cases (14/46) and cervical cancer in 17% (8/46). The apps were mainly informative (63%, 29/46), preventive (24%, 11/46), and diagnostic (13%, 6/46). Only 7/46 apps (15%) were developed by health care organizations. The mean MARS score for the overall quality of the 46 apps was 2.98 (SD 0.77), with a maximum of 4.63 and a minimum of 1.95. Functionality scores were quite similar for most of the apps, with the greatest differences in Engagement and Esthetics, which showed acceptable scores in one-third of the apps. The 5 apps with the highest MARS score were the following: “Bladder cancer manager,” “Kidney cancer manager,” “My prostate cancer manager,” “Target Ovarian Cancer Symptoms Diary,” and “My Cancer Coach.” We observed statistically significant differences in the MARS score between the operating systems and the developer types (P<.001 and P=.01, respectively), but not for cost (P=.62). Conclusions MARS is a helpful methodology to decide which apps can be prescribed to patients and to identify which features should be addressed to improve these tools. Most of the apps designed for patients with genitourinary cancers only try to provide data about the disease, without coherent interactivity. The participation of health professionals in the development of these apps is low; nevertheless, we observed that both the participation of health professionals and regular updates were correlated with quality.

health care sciences & services,medical informatics
Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Clinical Validation of the Mini Sarcopenia Risk Assessment Questionnaire in Community-Dwelling Spanish Older Adults

Inés Moreno-Sánchez,Agustín Aibar-Almazán,María del Carmen Carcelén-Fraile,Ana Belén Parra-Díaz,Indalecio Sánchez-Montesinos García,Marcelina Sánchez-Alcalá,Javier Cano-Sánchez,Fidel Hita-Contreras

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14192123

IF: 3.6

2024-09-26

Diagnostics

Abstract:(1) Background: The aim was to analyze the reliability and validity of the Spanish version of the Mini Sarcopenia Risk Assessment (MSRA) in older adults. (2) Methods: A total of 136 participants (72.24 ± 5.21 years, 68.38% women) took part in the study. The MSRA includes two questionnaires with seven (MSRA-7) and five items (MSRA-5). First, reliability (inter-rater and test–retest) of the Spanish MSRA was studied, and then the total scores were compared with the presence of sarcopenia according to three different diagnostic criteria and with other parameters related to sarcopenia (clinical validation). (3) Results: The analysis showed excellent inter-rater and test–retest reliability. As for the clinical validation, and regardless of the criteria, both questionnaires had a high sensitivity (81.82–88.89% for the MSRA-5 and 90.91–94.44% for the MSRA-7), while the MSRA-5 showed a better specificity (32.00–33.90%) than the MSRA-7 (20.80–22.88%). Predictive positive values ranged from 9.57–17.02% (MSRA-5) and 9.17–15.54% (MSRA-7), while predictive negative values were high for both the MSRA-5 (95.24%) and the MSRA-7 (96.30–96.43%). The accuracy was better for the MSRA-5 (36.03–41.18%) than the MSRA-7 (26.47–32.35%), as well as the area under the curve (0.67–0.76 vs. 0.65–0.73, respectively). Higher MSRA-5 and MSRA-7 total scores significantly correlated with greater muscle strength, quantity and gait speed. (4) Conclusions: The adaptation of the Spanish MSRA questionnaires was successfully performed, and they are reliable and clinically valid tools for assessing sarcopenia.

medicine, general & internal
Mobile health apps for cardiovascular risk assessment: a systematic review

Fabian A Chavez-Ecos,Rodrigo Chavez-Ecos,Carlos Vergara Sanchez,Miguel A Chavez-Gutarra,Anandita Agarwala,Kiara Camacho-Caballero

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2024.1420274

2024-09-23

Abstract:Introduction: mHealth apps (MHA) are emerging as promising tools for cardiovascular risk assessment, but few meet the standards required for clinical use. We aim to evaluate the quality and functionality of mHealth apps for cardiovascular risk assessment by healthcare professionals. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of MHA for cardiovascular risk assessment in the Apple Store, Play Store, and Microsoft Store until August 2023. Our eligibility criteria were based on the 2021 European Society Cardiology Guidelines on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice, the Framingham Risk Score, and the Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease score. Our protocol was drafted using the Preferred Reporting items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. To assess quality, we used the validated Mobile Apps Rating Scale (MARS) score, which includes 19 items across four objective scales (engagement, functionality, aesthetics, and information quality) and one additional subjective scale. For functionality evaluation, we used the IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics functionality scale. We performed data synthesis by generating descriptive statistics. Results: A total of 18 MHA were included in the review. The most common scores used were the Framingham score, ASCVD score, and Score 2. Only six apps achieved an overall score of 4 or greater in the MARS evaluation. The MHA with the highest MARS score was ESC CVD Risk Calculation (5 points), followed by ASCVD Risk Estimator Plus (4.9 points). In the IMS scale, four MHA had a high functionality score: ASCVD Risk Estimator Plus (5 points), ESC CVD Risk Calculation (5 points), MDCalc Medical Calculator (4 points), and Calculate by QsMD (4 points). Discussion: A gap exists in the availability of high-quality MHA designed for healthcare professionals to facilitate shared decision-making in cardiovascular risk assessment. Systematic review registration: The International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, identifier CRD42023453807.
Subfertility treatment in developing countries: attending to what women want.

J. Rizvi,N. Zuberi

Abstract:
Chinese Version of the mHealth App Usability Questionnaire: Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation

Shuqing Zhao,Yingjuan Cao,Heng Cao,Kao Liu,Xiaoyan Lv,Jinxin Zhang,Yuxin Li,Patricia M. Davidson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.813309

IF: 3.8

2022-02-02

Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract:Background Mobile health (mHealth) apps have shown the advantages of improving medication compliance, saving time required for diagnosis and treatment, reducing medical expenses, etc. The World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended that mHealth apps should be evaluated prior to their implementation to ensure their accuracy in data analysis. Objective This study aimed to translate the patient version of the interactive mHealth app usability questionnaire (MAUQ) into Chinese, and to conduct cross-cultural adaptation and reliability and validity tests. Methods The Brislin’s translation model was used in this study. The cross-cultural adaptation was performed according to experts’ comments and the results of prediction test. The convenience sampling method was utilized to investigate 346 patients who used the “Good Doctor” (“Good Doctor” is the most popular mHealth app in China), and the reliability and validity of the questionnaire were evaluated as well. Results After translation and cross-cultural adaptation, there were a total of 21 items and 3 dimensions: usability and satisfaction (8 items), system information arrangement (6 items), and efficiency (7 items). The content validity index was determined to be 0.952, indicating that the 21 items used to evaluate the usability of the Chinese version of the MAUQ were well correlated. The Cronbach’s α coefficient of the total questionnaire was 0.912, which revealed that the questionnaire had a high internal consistency. The values of test-retest reliability and split-half reliability of the Chinese version of the MAUQ were 0.869 and 0.701, respectively, representing that the questionnaire had a good stability. Conclusion The translated questionnaire has good reliability and validity in the context of Chinese culture, and it could be used as a usability testing tool for the patient version of interactive mHealth apps.

psychology, multidisciplinary

[The pathophysiology of hypercalcemia].

Promoting Health via mHealth Applications Using a French Version of the Mobile App Rating Scale: Adaptation and Validation Study

The Arabic Version of the Mobile App Rating Scale: Development and Validation Study

The German Version of the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS-G): Development and Validation Study

Validation of the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS)

Mobile App Rating Scale: A New Tool for Assessing the Quality of Health Mobile Apps

Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric validation of a Spanish version of the Maryland Assessment of Recovery Scale (MARS-12)

Spanish Version of the System Usability Scale for the Assessment of Electronic Tools: Development and Validation

Insights into the Quality of Mobile Health Apps: Preliminary Results of an Analysis of MARS Scores

[Serum cytokine profiling of prostate cancer and benign prostatic hyperplasia using recombinant antibody microarray].

Polyamines in normal and cataractous human lenses: evidence for post-translational modification.

Adaptation and Validation of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire for Spanish Adolescents

Assessing the Quality of Mobile Exercise Apps Based on the American College of Sports Medicine Guidelines: A Reliable and Valid Scoring Instrument.

Quality Assessment of Smartphone Medication Management Apps in France: Systematic Search

Validation of the Spanish version of the Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale (BSMAS) among Spanish adolescents

Ancestry-related differences in gene expression: findings may enhance understanding of health disparities between populations.

Assessing Apps for Patients with Genitourinary Tumors Using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS): Systematic Search in App Stores and Content Analysis

Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Clinical Validation of the Mini Sarcopenia Risk Assessment Questionnaire in Community-Dwelling Spanish Older Adults

Mobile health apps for cardiovascular risk assessment: a systematic review

Subfertility treatment in developing countries: attending to what women want.

Chinese Version of the mHealth App Usability Questionnaire: Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation