Download PDF
Methods Inf Med 2014; 53(03): 208-224
DOI: 10.3414/ME13-01-0093
Original Articles
Schattauer GmbH

A Pictorial Schema for a Comprehensive User-oriented Identification of Medical Apps

S. Bonacina
1   eHealthLAB – Laboratorio di Informatica BioMedica e Sanità Digitale, DEIB – Dipartimento di Elettronica, Informazione e Bioingegneria, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy
,
S. Marceglia
1   eHealthLAB – Laboratorio di Informatica BioMedica e Sanità Digitale, DEIB – Dipartimento di Elettronica, Informazione e Bioingegneria, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy
,
F. Pinciroli
1   eHealthLAB – Laboratorio di Informatica BioMedica e Sanità Digitale, DEIB – Dipartimento di Elettronica, Informazione e Bioingegneria, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received: 21 August 2013

accepted: 16 January 2014

Publication Date:
20 January 2018 (online)

  PDF Download  Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Objectives: The huge amount of released medical apps prevents medical app users from believing that medical scientific societies and other accreditation bodies as well, have the resources and the power for assigning to any medical app a quality score. By the time being, any medical app user has to take the risks related to the frequently insufficient accreditation of that app. Providing clear user-oriented schemas, to be adopted both when putting a medical App on the market and when an App comes to be evaluated by a cohort or single users, becomes crucial. The aim of our research was to define a pictorial identification one-shot schema for a comprehensive user-oriented identification of medical apps.

Methods: Adopting a pictorial approach is common in software design modeling. To build up our identification schema we started from the limited number of Apps already available on a web site of app reviews (iMedicalApps.com), and we identified an appropriately large set of attributes for describing medical apps. We arranged the attributes in six main families. We organized them in a one-shot comprehensive pictorial schema. We adopted a traffic light color code for assessing each attribute, that was sufficient to provide simple elements of alerts and alarms regarding a single App. Then, we considered apps from iMedicalApps.com web site belonging to three medical specialties: cardiology, oncology, and pharma and analyzed them according to the proposed pictorial schema.

Results: A pictorial schema having the attributes grouped in the families related to “Responsible Promoters”, “Offered Services”, “Searching Methods”, “Applications Domains”, “Envisaged Users”, and “Qualifiers and Quantifiers” has been identified. Furthermore, we produced a one-shot pictorial schema for each considered app, and for each medical specialty, we produced it also in an aggregated form.

Conclusions: The one-shot pictorial schema provides a useful perception of when and where to use a considered app. It fits positively the expectations of potential but different user’s profiles. It can be a first step towards a systematic assessment of apps from the user viewpoint.

Keywords

Media tablet apps - computers - handheld/trends - credentialing - quality control - soft-ware/utilization
 

  • References

  • 1 Marceglia S, Bonacina S, Zaccaria V, Pagliari C, Pinciroli F. How might the iPad change healthcare?. J R Soc Med. 2012; 105 (06) 233-241.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Huckvale K, Car M, Morrison C, Car J. Apps for asthma self-management: a systematic assessment of content and tools. BMC Med 2012; 10: 144
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Ricciardi L, Mostashari F, Murphy J, Daniel JG, Siminerio EP. A national action plan to support consumer engagement via e-health. Health Aff (Millwood) 2013; 32 (02) 376-384.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Ozdalga E, Ozdalga A, Ahuja N. The smartphone in medicine: a review of current and potential use among physicians and students. J Med Internet Res 2012; 14 (05) e128
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Burki TK. Cancer apps. Lancet Oncol 2013; 14 (07) 580-581.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 McCartney M. How do we know whether medical apps work?. BMJ 2013; 346: f1811
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 N. N. Most smartphone apps for melanoma detection are inaccurate. Health Devices 2013; 42 (04) 135
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Rosser BA, Eccleston C. Smartphone applications for pain management. J Telemed Telecare 2011; 17 (06) 308-312.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Visvanathan A, Hamilton A, Brady RR. Smartphone apps in microbiology - is better regulation required?. Clin Microbiol Infect 2012; 18 7E 218-20.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Demidowich AP, Lu K, Tamler R, Bloomgarden Z. An evaluation of diabetes self-management applications for Android smartphones. J Telemed Telecare 2012; 18 (04) 235-238.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Albrecht UV, von Jan U, Pramann O, Matthies HK. I, App: Trustworthy Medical Apps. T11- Village of the Future - Pillar 5: Social and Policy Incentive Framework. Medical Informatics Europe - MIE 2012. August 26th-29th, 2012. Pisa, Italy. Avail- able at URL. http://plrimedapplab.weebly.com/publications.html Accessed: November 15, 2013
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Lewis T. Apple now asking app developers to provide sources of medical information. (Online, September 18, 2013>). Available at URL. http://www.imedicalapps.com/2013/09/apple-app-developers-sources-medical-information/ Accessed: November 15, 2013
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Huy NP, vanThanh D. Evaluation of mobile app paradigms. Proceeding of MoMM ’12- The 10th International Conference on Advances in Mobile Computing & Multimedia. New York, NY: ACM; 2012. ISBN: 978-1-4503-1307-0 25-30.
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Peng H, Gates C, Sarma B. et al Using probabilistic generative models for ranking risks of Android apps. Proceeding of CCS ’12- The 2012 Association Computing Machinery (ACM) conference on Computer and communications security. New York, NY: ACM; 2012. SBN: 978-1-4503-1651-4 241-252.
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Barton AJ. The regulation of mobile health applications. BMC Med 2012; 10: 46
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Food and Drug Administration. Mobile Medi- cal Applications - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff. Avail- able at URL. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/UCM263366.pdf Accessed: November 15, 2013
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Albrecht UV, Von Jan U, Pramann O. Standard reporting for medical apps. Stud Health Technol Inform 2013; 190: 201-203.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Albrecht UV, von Jan U, Jungnickel T, Pramann O. App-synopsis - standard reporting for medical apps. Stud Health Technol Inform 2013; 192: 1154
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Happtique. Health App Certification Program. Certification Standards. (Online, October 2013). Available at URL. http://www.happtique.com/docs/HACP_Certification_Standards.pdf Accessed: November 15 2013
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Boyer C, Selby M, Scherrer JR, Appel RD. The Health On the Net Code of Conduct for medical and health Websites. Comput Biol Med 1998; 28 (05) 603-610.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Lewis TL. A systematic self-certification model for mobile medical apps. J MedInternet Res 2013; 15 (04) e89
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 mHIMSS App Usability Work Group. Selecting a Mobile App: Evaluating the Usability of Medical Applications. The Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society (HIMSS). July. 2012
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 iMedicalApps. Available at URL. http://www.imedicalapps.com Accessed: November 15 2013
    Google Scholar
  • 24 MedicalApp Journal. Available at URL http://medicalappjournal.com/ Accessed.November 15 2013
    PubMed
  • 25 Dayer L, Heldenbrand S, Anderson P, Gubbins PO, Martin BC. Smartphone medication adherence apps: potential benefits to patients and providers. J Am Pharm Assoc 2013; 53 (02) 172-181.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Goldbach H, Chang AY, Kyer A, Ketshogileng D, Taylor L, Chandra A, Dacso M, Kung SJ, Rijken T, Fontelo P, Littman-Quinn R, Seymour AK, Kovarik CL. Evaluation of generic medical information accessed via mobile phones at the point of care in resource-limited settings. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013 (Epub ahead of print). PubMed PMID: 23535665..
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Wolf JA, Moreau JF, Akilov O, Patton T, English JC, Ho J, Ferris LK. Diagnostic inaccuracy of smartphone applications for melanoma detection. JAMA Dermatol 2013; 149 (04) 422-426.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Franko I O. Smartphone apps for orthopaedic surgeons. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011; 469 (07) 2042-2048.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Cornwall J, Pollard MF. Evaluation of free i-applications for tertiary level gross anatomy education. Australas Med J 2012; 5 (04) 239-242.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 NHS Health Apps Library. Available at URL. http://apps.nhs.uk/ Accessed November 15 2013
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Marceglia S, Mazzola L, Bonacina S, Tarquini P, Donzelli P, Pinciroli F. A comprehensive e-prescribing model to allow representing, comparing, and analyzing available systems. Methods Inf Med 2013; 52 (03) 199-219.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 International Organization for Standardization (ISO). IEC 62366:2007, Medical devices - Application of usability engineering to medical devices. 2008. Available at URL. http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store/catalogue_ics/catalogue_detail_ics.htm?csnumber=38594 Accessed: November, 15 2013
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP, Corle DK, Green SB, Shairer C, Mulvihill JJ. Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst 1989; 81 (24) 1879-1886.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Rockhill B, Spiegelman D, Byrne C, Hunter DJ, Colditz GA. Validation of the Gail. et al model of breast cancer risk prediction and implications for chemoprevention. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001; 93 (05) 358-366.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Pletneva N, Vargas A, Boyer C. Health on the Net. Requirements for the general public health search. Deliverable of EU project KHRESMOI. (Online, May 20, 2011). Available at URL. http://www.hon.ch/Global/pdf/Khresmoi/KHRESMOI_general_public_survey_report.pdf Accessed: November 15 2013
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Associazione Nazionale Medici Cardiologi Ospedalieri (ANMCO). Available at URL. http://www.anmco.it . Accessed: November 15, 2013 (in Italian)
    PubMedGoogle Scholar