Background

Whilst apps and e-tools have tremendous potential as low-cost, scalable mental health intervention and prevention tools, it is essential that consumers and health professionals have a means by which to evaluate their quality and safety.

Objective

This study aimed to: 1) adapt the original Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) in order to be appropriate for the evaluation of both mobile phone applications as well as e-tools; 2) test the reliability of the revised scale; and 3) develop a quality assurance protocol for identifying and rating new apps and e-tools to determine appropriateness for use in clinical practice.

Methods

The MARS was adapted to include items specific to health-related apps and e-tools, such as the availability of resources, strategies for self-management, and quality information. The 41 apps and e-tools in the standard youth configuration of the InnoWell Platform, a digital tool designed to support or enhance mental health service delivery, were independently rated by two expert raters using the A-MARS. Cronbach's alpha was used to calculate the internal consistency and interclass correlation coefficients were used to calculate interrater reliability.

Results

The A-MARS was shown to be a reliable scale with acceptable to excellent internal consistency and moderate to excellent interrater reliability across the subscales. Given the ever-increasing number of health information technologies on the market, a protocol to identify and rate new apps and e-tools for potential clinical use is presented.

Conclusions

Whilst the A-MARS is a useful tool to guide health professionals as they explore available apps and e-tools for potential clinical use, the training, time, and skill required to use it effectively may be prohibitive. As such, health professionals and services are likely to benefit from including a digital navigator as part of the care team to assist in selecting and rating apps and e-tools, increasing the usability of the data, and technology troubleshooting. When selecting, evaluating and/or recommending apps and e-tools to consumers, it is important to consider: 1) the availability of explicit strategies to set, monitor and review SMART goals; 2) the accessibility of credible, user friendly information and resources from reputable sources; 3) evidence of effectiveness; and 4) interoperability with other health information technologies.

中文翻译：

---

评估与健康相关的应用程序和电子工具的质量和安全性：调整移动应用程序评级量表并制定质量保证协议

背景

虽然应用程序和电子工具作为低成本、可扩展的心理健康干预和预防工具具有巨大潜力，但消费者和卫生专业人员必须有一种方法来评估其质量和安全性。

客观的

本研究旨在： 1) 调整原始移动应用评级量表 (MARS)，以适用于移动电话应用和电子工具的评估；2）检验修改后量表的信度；3) 制定质量保证协议，用于识别和评估新应用程序和电子工具，以确定在临床实践中使用的适用性。

方法

MARS 被改编为包括特定于健康相关应用程序和电子工具的项目，例如资源的可用性、自我管理的策略和质量信息。InnoWell 平台的标准青少年配置中的 41 个应用程序和电子工具是一种旨在支持或增强心理健康服务交付的数字工具，由两名专家评估者使用 A-MARS 独立评估。Cronbach's alpha 用于计算内部一致性，组间相关系数用于计算评估者间信度。

结果

A-MARS 被证明是一个可靠的量表，具有可以接受到极好的内部一致性和中等到极好的跨分量表的评估者间信度。鉴于市场上的健康信息技术数量不断增加，本文提出了一种用于识别和评估潜在临床应用的新应用程序和电子工具的协议。

结论

虽然 A-MARS 是一种有用的工具，可以指导卫生专业人员探索潜在临床应用的可用应用程序和电子工具，但有效使用它所需的培训、时间和技能可能令人望而却步。因此，医疗专业人员和服务可能会受益于将数字导航器作为护理团队的一部分，以帮助选择和评估应用程序和电子工具，提高数据的可用性和技术故障排除。在向消费者选择、评估和/或推荐应用程序和电子工具时，重要的是要考虑： 1) 制定、监控和审查 SMART 目标的明确策略的可用性；2) 可信的、用户友好的信息和资源的可访问性；3) 有效性的证据；4) 与其他卫生信息技术的互操作性。