Free smoking cessation mobile apps available in Australia: a quality review and content analysis

Abstract

Objectives: This review aimed to identify free, high-quality, smoking cessation mobile applications (apps) that adhere to Australian smoking cessation treatment guidelines. Methods:A systematic search of smoking cessation apps was conducted using Google. The technical quality of relevant apps was rated using the Mobile Application Rating Scale. The content of apps identified as high quality was assessed for adherence to smoking cessation treatment guidelines.Results: 112 relevant apps were identified. The majority were of poor technical quality and only six 'high-quality' apps were identified. These apps adhered to Australian treatment guidelines in part. The efficacy of two apps had been previously evaluated. Conclusions:In lieu of more substantial research in this area, it is suggested that the highquality apps identified in this review may be more likely than other available apps to encourage smoking cessation. Implications for public health:Smoking cessation apps have the potential to address many barriers that prevent smoking cessation support being provided; however few high-quality smoking cessation apps are currently available in Australia, very few have been evaluated and the app market is extremely volatile. More research to evaluate smoking cessation apps, and sustained funding for evidence-based apps, is needed.

A Face-Aging Smoking Prevention/Cessation Intervention for Nursery School Students in Germany: An Appearance-Focused Interventional Study

“…Mobile apps have been evaluated and optimized for use in smoking cessation [37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60], but few randomized trials have been completed. In the school setting, we identified no completed randomized trials and few app-based studies beyond our own research [34,36].…”

Smartphone Apps About Crystal Methamphetamine (“Ice”): Systematic Search in App Stores and Assessment of Composition and Quality (Preprint)

“…Adopting similar methodology to that used in previous reviews of smartphone apps [20,23], the Australian Google Play store for Android phone apps, and Australian iOS iTunes store for Apple iPhone apps were searched in April 2017. A comprehensive list of keywords, including common street names for crystal methamphetamine, were used including; 'crystal methamphetamine', 'methamphetamine', 'crystal meth', 'ice drug', 'meth', 'shabu', 'tina', 'glass', 'illegal drugs' and 'illicit drugs'.…”

“…Increasingly used in the mobile health field e.g [20,35] Responses are made on a five-point scale (1='inadequate') to (5='excellent'), with mean scores calculated for each dimension. An overall mean quality rating score is calculated by combining the mean scores for the first four subscales, excluding subjective quality.…”

“…Whilst scientific evaluation of the effectiveness of apps is important, the speed with which the app market and the technology on which it is based changes rapidly, and the length of time needed to conduct and publish randomised controlled trials presents a considerable challenge to researchers [12]. Some reviewers have suggested it might be useful for the mHealth field more broadly to focus on more pragmatic and less traditional modes of evaluation to assess the effectiveness of apps and other mHealth interventions to enable the field to build the evidence-base more quickly [20,25].…”

“…Systematic reviews of smartphone apps have been conducted in a range of health domains including depression [16], anxiety [17], bipolar disorder [18], smoking cessation [19,20], nutrition [21], diabetes management [22], suicide prevention [23], health information-seeking for cancer [24] and psychology or general mental health [25][26][27]. The majority of these reviews focuses on quality and content of apps and conclude that existing apps vary in quality, with few grounded in scientific evidence.…”