This site needs JavaScript to work properly. Please enable it to take advantage of the complete set of features!
Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

NIH NLM Logo
Log in
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Jun 10;4(2):e72.
doi: 10.2196/mhealth.5849.

Development and Validation of the User Version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale (uMARS)

Affiliations

Development and Validation of the User Version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale (uMARS)

Stoyan R Stoyanov et al. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. .

Abstract

Background: The Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) provides a reliable method to assess the quality of mobile health (mHealth) apps. However, training and expertise in mHealth and the relevant health field is required to administer it.

Objective: This study describes the development and reliability testing of an end-user version of the MARS (uMARS).

Methods: The MARS was simplified and piloted with 13 young people to create the uMARS. The internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the uMARS was then examined in a second sample of 164 young people participating in a randomized controlled trial of a mHealth app. App ratings were collected using the uMARS at 1-, 3,- and 6-month follow up.

Results: The uMARS had excellent internal consistency (alpha = .90), with high individual alphas for all subscales. The total score and subscales had good test-retest reliability over both 1-2 months and 3 months.

Conclusions: The uMARS is a simple tool that can be reliably used by end-users to assess the quality of mHealth apps.

Keywords: Australia; Internet; MARS; RCT; anxiety; anxiety disorders; app evaluation; app rating; app trial; cellphone; cognitive behavioral therapy; depression; depressive disorder; e-therapy; eHealth; ehealth; emental health; end user; evidence-informed; mHealth; mHealth evaluation; mHealth implementation; mental health; mhealth trial; mobile application; mobile health; online; randomized controlled trial; reliability; research translation; smartphone; telemedicine; user testing; well being.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

References

    1. Aitken M, Lyle J. Patient Adoption of mHealth: Use, Evidence and Remaining Barriers to Mainstream Acceptance. Parsippany, NJ: IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics; 2015. [2016年05月30日]. http://www.imshealth.com/files/web/IMSH%20Institute/Reports/Patient%20Ad... .
    1. Pagoto S, Bennett GG. How behavioral science can advance digital health. Transl Behav Med. 2013 Sep;3(3):271–6. doi: 10.1007/s13142-013-0234-z. http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/24073178 234 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chan S, Torous J, Hinton L, Yellowlees P. Towards a Framework for Evaluating Mobile Mental Health Apps. Telemed J E Health. 2015 Dec;21(12):1038–41. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2015.0002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Su W. A preliminary survey of knowledge discovery on smartphone applications (apps): Principles, techniques and research directions for e-health. arXiv preprint arXiv; International Conference on Complex Medical Engineering; June 26-29, 2014; Taipei, Taiwan. 2014. Jun 26, p. 14077314.
    1. Andersson G, Cuijpers P, Carlbring P, Riper H, Hedman E. Guided Internet-based vs. face-to-face cognitive behavior therapy for psychiatric and somatic disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World Psychiatry. 2014 Oct;13(3):288–95. doi: 10.1002/wps.20151. doi: 10.1002/wps.20151. - DOI - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources

Full text links
JMIR Publications full text link JMIR Publications Free PMC article
Cite

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /