Reporting quality of published reviews of commercial and publicly available mobile health apps (mHealth app reviews): a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Reviews of commercial and publicly available smartphone (mobile) health applications (mHealth app reviews) are being undertaken and published. However, there is variation in the conduct and reporting of mHealth app reviews, with no existing reporting guidelines. Building on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we aim to develop the Consensus for APP Review Reporting Items (CAPPRRI) guidance, to support the conduct and reporting of mHealth app reviews. This scoping review of published mHealth app reviews will explore their alignment, deviation, and modification to the PRISMA 2020 items for systematic reviews and identify a list of possible items to include in CAPPRRI. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: We are following the Joanna Briggs Institute approach and Arksey and O'Malley's five-step process. Patient and public contributors, mHealth app review, digital health research and evidence synthesis experts, healthcare professionals and a specialist librarian gave feedback on the methods. We will search SCOPUS, CINAHL Plus, AMED, EMBASE, Medline, APA PsycINFO and the ACM Digital Library for articles reporting mHealth app reviews and use a two-step screening process to identify eligible articles. Information on whether the authors have reported, or how they have modified the PRISMA 2020 items in their reporting, will be extracted. Data extraction will also include the article characteristics, protocol and registration information, review question frameworks used, information about the search and screening process, how apps have been evaluated and evidence of stakeholder engagement. This will be analysed using a content synthesis approach and presented using descriptive statistics and summaries. This protocol is registered on OSF (https://osf.io/5ahjx). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required. The findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal publications (shared on our project website and on the EQUATOR Network website where the CAPPRRI guidance has been registered as under development), conference presentations and blog and social media posts in lay language.

A systematic review of menopause apps with an emphasis on osteoporosis.

BACKGROUND: Menopause can significantly hasten bone loss. Mobile phones provide an efficient way to manage, track and understand menopause using apps. A previous review of menopause apps found numerous apps designed to help women manage menopause. However, it did not use validated measures to assess the quality of the apps and did not focus on content related to osteoporosis. METHODS: This app review aligns with the updated Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. The keywords used to search for the apps were "menopause" and "menopausal". Apps were included if they were in English, for individuals or groups and had a lifestyle focus. Apps that looked at other aspects of women's health, required external devices, cost to download, or were symptom-tracking were excluded. The quality and functionality were assessed using the Mobile App Rating Scale and IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics Functionality score. Data were synthesised descriptively. RESULTS: Twenty-eight apps were selected and reviewed from the 236 apps screened from the Apple store and Google play store. Only 57% of the apps reviewed (n = 16) had content on osteoporosis which was educational in purpose. The readability of the apps was complex and best understood by university graduates. The average functionality score of the apps reviewed was 4.57 out of 11 and that of quality is 3.1 out of 5, both of which need improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Existing menopause apps need more input from experts to improve the quality and functionality, using simple language. More emphasis on specific health problems during menopause, including osteoporosis, is required. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not relevant.