An Evaluation of Mobile Applications for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility Providers.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and rate reproductive endocrinology and infertility (REI) mobile applications (apps) targeted toward REI providers. DESIGN: A list of REI apps was found in both the Apple iTunes and Google Play stores using the following seven MeSH terms: reproductive endocrinology, REI, infertility, fertility, In Vitro Fertilization, IVF, and embryology. Patient-centered apps were excluded. The remaining apps were then evaluated for accuracy using reliable references. SETTING: Mobile technology. PATIENTS/INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Accurate apps were evaluated for comprehensiveness (the extent of the ability to aid in clinical decision-making) and rated with objective and subjective components using the APPLICATIONS scoring system. RESULTS: Using the seven REI-related MeSH terms, 985 apps and 1,194 apps were identified in the Apple iTunes and Google Play stores, respectively. Of these unique apps, only 20 remained after excluding patient-centered apps. Upon further review for applicability to REI specifically and content accuracy, only seven apps remained. These seven apps were then rated using the APPLICATIONS scoring system. CONCLUSION: Only 0.32% of 2,179 apps reviewed for this study were useful to REI providers. There is potential for further mobile resource development in the area of REI, given the limited number and varying comprehensiveness and quality of available apps.

Identification and Rating of Gynecologic Oncology Applications Using the APPLICATIONS Scoring System.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there are thousands of medical applications (apps) on the market potentially leading to app overload. Finding useful and accurate apps may be time-consuming and frustrating to gynecologic oncologists. INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study is to identify and rate gynecologic oncology (gyn-onc) apps using the APPLICATIONS scoring system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A list of nonconsumer gyn-onc apps was identified from the Apple iTunes and Google Play Stores. Based on reliable references, inaccurate apps were excluded. The remaining apps were rated with the APPLICATIONS scoring system, which uses both objective and subjective measures. RESULTS: Of 748 apps identified, 11 (1.5%) were found to be both useful and accurate to gyn-onc providers. The apps with the lowest scores were calculator apps, while those with the highest scores were informational apps. DISCUSSION: We found useful and accurate calculator, screening, staging, and informational apps. However, a large number of the apps found were considered inaccurate or non-gyn-onc specific. CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic method for identifying and rating apps with the APPLICATIONS scoring system can be applied within other subspecialties of obstetrics and gynecology and other specialties of medicine to offer providers with apps in clinical care.

Evaluation of Smartphone Menstrual Cycle Tracking Applications Using an Adapted APPLICATIONS Scoring System.

OBJECTIVE: To identify smartphone menstrual cycle tracking applications (apps) and evaluate their accuracy, features, and functionality. METHODS: In this systematic evaluation, we searched the Apple iTunes store for free menstrual cycle tracking apps for patient use. We considered an application accurate if menstrual cycle predictions were based on average cycle lengths of at least three previous cycles, ovulation (when included) was predicted at 13-15 days before the start of the next cycle, and the application contained no misinformation. We modified the APPLICATIONS Scoring System to evaluate the features and functionality of accurate apps. RESULTS: Our search criteria yielded 1,116 apps; 108 remained after excluding duplicate, non-English, nonmenstrual cycle tracking, and priced apps. We further eliminated 88 that did not meet inclusion or accuracy criteria. Of the 20 accurate, free apps, 80% contained information for conception and 50% for contraception. Common features and functionality included password protection (55%); no requirement for Internet connectivity (80%); no advertisements (65%); in-application technical support (70%); medical disclaimers (65%); health education (55%); tracking of menstrual flow (70%), symptoms (70%), and intercourse (75%); alerts for next menses (65%) and fertility (55%); and cycle length information (75%). Forty percent were available for Android. Usefulness for fertility medications (15%), professional involvement (5%), and cited literature (5%) were rare. CONCLUSION: Most free smartphone menstrual cycle tracking apps for patient use are inaccurate. Few cite medical literature or health professional involvement. We list accurate apps to aid health care providers in understanding the key components they can use to evaluate and recommend apps for patients.

Rating Pregnancy Wheel Applications Using the APPLICATIONS Scoring System.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the top-rated pregnancy wheel applications (apps) using a newly developed APPLICATIONS scoring system. METHODS: A list of pregnancy wheel apps was identified. Consumer-based and inaccurate apps were excluded. The APPLICATIONS scoring system was developed to rate the remaining apps. Application comprehensiveness was evaluated. Objective rating components included price, paid subscription, literature used, in-app purchases, connectivity to the Internet, advertisements, text search field, interdevice compatibility, and other components such as images or figures, videos, and special features. Subjective rating components were ease of navigation and subjective presentation. RESULTS: A complete list of 55 pregnancy wheel apps was created from three sources. Thirty-nine (71%) were consumer-based, inaccurate, or both, leaving 16 (29%) for analysis using the APPLICATIONS scoring system. CONCLUSION: More than two thirds of pregnancy wheel apps were excluded from our study secondary to being consumer-based, inaccurate, or both. This highlights the importance of identifying systematically, reviewing critically, and rating the thousands of available apps to health care providers to ensure accuracy and applicability. We propose that our APPLICATIONS scoring system be used to rate apps in all specialties with the goal of improving health care provider performance and thereby patient outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Identification of iPhone and iPad applications for obstetrics and gynecology providers.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically identify the number of applications ("apps") compatible with the iPhone and the iPad that are potentially useful to obstetrician-gynecologists (ob-gyns). METHODS: Obstetrics and gynecology MeSH terms were searched in the Apple iTunes Store. A master list of unique apps was created and the apps were divided into categories and subcategories. RESULTS: A total of 1,816 unique apps using 55 different obstetrics and gynecology MeSH terms were found. Of these unique apps, 242 apps (13.3%) were considered potentially useful to ob-gyns. The MeSH terms that yielded the highest number of potentially useful apps were "gynecology" (23%), "breast cancer" (17%), "obstetrics" (14%), and "pregnancy" (12%). CONCLUSION: Less than 15% of apps found were considered potentially useful to ob-gyns. Thus, the obstetrics and gynecology community is in need of an organized effort to identify, review, and determine the accuracy of apps that can potentially improve the performance of health care providers and lead to better patient outcomes. We propose the formation of a committee to guide in this important task.