» Articles » PMID: 25760773

Mobile App Rating Scale: a New Tool for Assessing the Quality of Health Mobile Apps

Overview
Date 2015 Mar 12
PMID 25760773
Citations 835
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The use of mobile apps for health and well being promotion has grown exponentially in recent years. Yet, there is currently no app-quality assessment tool beyond "star"-ratings.

Objective: The objective of this study was to develop a reliable, multidimensional measure for trialling, classifying, and rating the quality of mobile health apps.

Methods: A literature search was conducted to identify articles containing explicit Web or app quality rating criteria published between January 2000 and January 2013. Existing criteria for the assessment of app quality were categorized by an expert panel to develop the new Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) subscales, items, descriptors, and anchors. There were sixty well being apps that were randomly selected using an iTunes search for MARS rating. There were ten that were used to pilot the rating procedure, and the remaining 50 provided data on interrater reliability.

Results: There were 372 explicit criteria for assessing Web or app quality that were extracted from 25 published papers, conference proceedings, and Internet resources. There were five broad categories of criteria that were identified including four objective quality scales: engagement, functionality, aesthetics, and information quality; and one subjective quality scale; which were refined into the 23-item MARS. The MARS demonstrated excellent internal consistency (alpha = .90) and interrater reliability intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC = .79).

Conclusions: The MARS is a simple, objective, and reliable tool for classifying and assessing the quality of mobile health apps. It can also be used to provide a checklist for the design and development of new high quality health apps.

Citing Articles

Promoting active transportation through technology: a scoping review of mobile apps for walking and cycling.

Siriaporn N, de Nazelle A, Vuillemin A BMC Public Health. 2025; 25(1):952.

PMID: 40065314 PMC: 11895142. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-025-22131-6.


Usability and Implementation Considerations of Fitbit and App Intervention for Diverse Cancer Survivors: Mixed Methods Study.

Dabbagh Z, Najjar R, Kamberi A, Gerber B, Singh A, Soni A JMIR Cancer. 2025; 11:e60034.

PMID: 39993013 PMC: 11875131. DOI: 10.2196/60034.


Health professionals' use of smartphone apps for clients with low back pain: an observational study.

Didyk C, Lewis L, Lange B Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2025; 26:e14.

PMID: 39991859 PMC: 11883799. DOI: 10.1017/S1463423625000209.


Depression Self-Care Apps' Characteristics and Applicability to Older Adults: Systematic Assessment.

Yin R, Rajappan D, Martinengo L, Chan F, Smith H, Griva K J Med Internet Res. 2025; 27:e56418.

PMID: 39983112 PMC: 11890144. DOI: 10.2196/56418.


Assessment of Environmental, Sociocultural, and Physiological Influences on Women's Toileting Decisions and Behaviors Using "Where I Go": Pilot Study of a Mobile App.

Smith A, Mueller E, Lewis C, Markland A, Smerdon C, Smith A JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2025; 13:e56533.

PMID: 39980161 PMC: 11838143. DOI: 10.2196/56533.


References
1.
Kim P, Eng T, Deering M, Maxfield A . Published criteria for evaluating health related web sites: review. BMJ. 1999; 318(7184):647-9. PMC: 27772. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.318.7184.647. View

2.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman D . Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Int J Surg. 2010; 8(5):336-41. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.02.007. View

3.
Riley W, Rivera D, Atienza A, Nilsen W, Allison S, Mermelstein R . Health behavior models in the age of mobile interventions: are our theories up to the task?. Transl Behav Med. 2011; 1(1):53-71. PMC: 3142960. DOI: 10.1007/s13142-011-0021-7. View

4.
Lewis T, Wyatt J . mHealth and mobile medical Apps: a framework to assess risk and promote safer use. J Med Internet Res. 2014; 16(9):e210. PMC: 4180335. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.3133. View

5.
Zou G . Sample size formulas for estimating intraclass correlation coefficients with precision and assurance. Stat Med. 2012; 31(29):3972-81. DOI: 10.1002/sim.5466. View