Smartphone applications for cancer patients: what we know about them?
Smartphone applications for cancer patients: what we know about them?
复制标题
DOI：
10.7399/fh.2016.40.1.8993
复制
发表时间：
2016-02-01
影响因子：
1.4
通讯作者：
Sanjurjo-Sáez, María
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Collado-Borrell, Roberto;Escudero-Vilaplana, Vicente;Sanjurjo-Sáez, María
背景与目的：从医疗保健应用中获益最多的群体之一是癌症患者。然而，并不是所有的申请都有足够的证据。我们的目标是分析癌症患者移动医疗应用程序的特点，并了解其信息的可靠性。材料和方法：一项针对癌症患者的移动应用程序的描述性观察研究。2014年11月，我们在App Store （iOS）和b谷歌Play （Android）上搜索癌症患者的移动应用程序，使用术语“cancer”和“oncology”（英语和/或西班牙语）。应用程序被下载并评估。我们在Excel图表上记录了他们的一般特征（癌症分类、最后实现日期、语言等）和目的（无论是信息、诊断还是预防目的）。分析是通过互联网搜索来分析他们的科学证据来完成的。结果：下载了166个应用程序。23.5%的人注定会患乳腺癌。52.4%的人在去年升级了软件。98.2%为英文。大多数应用程序都有不止一个目的。最常见的是信息性（39.8%）、诊断性（38.6%）和预防性（28.3%）。50.6%的人有充分的科学证据。结论：这些应用有望带来许多益处。然而，我们发现信息缺乏有效性，以及数据缺乏更新。为了防止这些应用程序成为一个安全问题，而不是对患者有用的工具，应该实施监管。
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: one of the groups that can benefit most from healthcare applications, are cancer patients. However, not all applications have a sufficient level of evidence. Our objective is to analyze the characteristics of mobile healthcare applications for cancer patients and know the reliability of their information.MATERIAL AND METHODS: a descriptive observational study of mobile apps targeting cancer patients. In November 2014, we searched mobile applications for cancer patients in the App Store (iOS) and Google Play (Android), using the terms "cancer" and "oncology" (English and/or Spanish languages). Applications were downloaded and evaluated. We registered their general characteristics (classification of cancer, last date of actualization, language and others) and their purpose (whether were informative, diagnostic, or preventive purposes) on an Excel chart. The analysis was completed with an internet search to analyze their scientific evidence.RESULTS: one hundred and sixty six applications were downloaded. 23.5% were destined for breast cancer. 52.4% upgraded their software in the last year. 98.2 % were in English. Most of the applications had more than one purpose. The most frequent were informative (39.8%), diagnostic (38.6%) and preventive (28.3%). 50.6% presented sufficient scientific evidence.CONCLUSIONS: there are many benefits that are expected from these applications. However, we detected a lack of validity of the information, as well as lack of update of the data. To prevent these apps from becoming a safety problem rather than a useful tool for patients, regulation should be put in place.