Background Mobile phones and tablets are being increasingly integrated into the daily lives of many people worldwide. Mobile health (mHealth) apps have promising possibilities for optimizing health systems, improving care and health, and reducing health disparities. However, health care apps often seem to be underused after being downloaded. Objective The aim of this paper is to reach a better understanding of people’s perceptions, beliefs, and experience of mHealth apps as well as to determine how highly they appreciate these tools. Methods A systematic review was carried out on qualitative studies published in English, on patients’ perception of mHealth apps between January 2013 and June 2018. Data extracted from these articles were synthesized using a meta-ethnographic approach and an interpretative method. Results A total of 356 articles were selected for screening, and 43 of them met the inclusion criteria. Most of the articles included populations inhabiting developed countries and were published during the last 2 years, and most of the apps on which they focused were designed to help patients with chronic diseases. In this review, we present the strengths and weaknesses of using mHealth apps from the patients’ point of view. The strengths can be categorized into two main aspects: engaging patients in their own health care and increasing patient empowerment. The weaknesses pointed out by the participants focus on four main topics: trustworthiness, appropriateness, personalization, and accessibility of these tools. Conclusions Although many of the patients included in the studies reviewed considered mHealth apps as a useful complementary tool, some major problems arise in their optimal use, including the need for more closely tailored designs, the cost of these apps, the validity of the information delivered, and security and privacy issues. Many of these issues could be resolved with more support from health providers. In addition, it would be worth developing standards to ensure that these apps provide patients accurate evidence-based information.

Background: Palliative care is often underutilized or initiated late in the course of life-threatening illness. Randomized clinical Early Palliative Care (EPC) trials provide an opportunity for changing oncologists' perceptions of palliative care and their attitudes to referring patients to palliative care services. Aim: To describe French oncologists' perceptions of EPC and their effects on referral practices before a clinical EPC trial was launched. Design: A qualitative study involving semistructured face-to-face interviews. The data were analyzed using the Grounded Theory coding method. Setting/Participants: Thirteen oncologists and 19 palliative care specialists (PCSs) working at 10 hospitals all over France were interviewed. Most of them were involved in clinical EPC trials. Results: The findings suggest that referral to PCSs shortly after the diagnosis of advanced cancer increases the terminological barriers, induces avoidance patterns, and makes early disclosure of poor prognosis harder for oncologists. This situation is attributable to the widespread idea that palliative care means terminal care. In addition, the fact that the EPC concept is poorly understood increases the confusion between EPC and supportive care. Conclusion: Defining the EPC concept more clearly and explaining to health professionals and patients what EPC consists of and what role it is intended to play, and the potential benefits of palliative care services could help to overcome the wording barriers rooted in the traditional picture of palliative care. In addition, training French oncologists how to disclose ''bad news'' could help them cope with the emotional issues involved in referring patients to specialized palliative care.