Measuring the Quality of Clinical Skills Mobile Apps for Student Learning: Systematic Search, Analysis, and Comparison of Two Measurement Scales (Preprint)

Abstract

BACKGROUND Mobile apps are widely used in health professions, which increases the need for simple methods to determine the quality of apps. In particular, teachers need the ability to curate high-quality mobile apps for student learning. OBJECTIVE This study aims to systematically search for and evaluate the quality of clinical skills mobile apps as learning tools. The quality of apps meeting the specified criteria was evaluated using two measures—the widely used Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS), which measures general app quality, and the Mobile App Rubric for Learning (MARuL), a recently developed instrument that measures the value of apps for student learning—to assess whether MARuL is more effective than MARS in identifying high-quality apps for learning. METHODS Two mobile app stores were systematically searched using clinical skills terms commonly found in medical education and apps meeting the criteria identified using an approach based on PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. A total of 9 apps were identified during the screening process. The apps were rated independently by 2 reviewers using MARS and MARuL. RESULTS The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for the 2 raters using MARS and MARuL were the same (MARS ICC [two-way]=0.68; <i>P</i><.001 and MARuL ICC [two-way]=0.68; <i>P</i><.001). Of the 9 apps, Geeky Medics-OSCE revision (MARS Android=3.74; MARS iOS=3.68; MARuL Android=75; and MARuL iOS=73) and OSCE PASS: Medical Revision (MARS Android=3.79; MARS iOS=3.71; MARuL Android=69; and MARuL iOS=73) scored highly on both measures of app quality and for both Android and iOS. Both measures also showed agreement for the lowest rated app, Patient Education Institute (MARS Android=2.21; MARS iOS=2.11; MARuL Android=18; and MARuL iOS=21.5), which had the lowest scores in all categories except information (MARS) and professional (MARuL) in both operating systems. MARS and MARuL were both able to differentiate between the highest and lowest quality apps; however, MARuL was better able to differentiate apps based on teaching and learning quality. CONCLUSIONS This systematic search and rating of clinical skills apps for learning found that the quality of apps was highly variable. However, 2 apps—Geeky Medics-OSCE revision and OSCE PASS: Medical Revision—rated highly for both versions and with both quality measures. MARS and MARuL showed similar abilities to differentiate the quality of the 9 apps. However, MARuL’s incorporation of teaching and learning elements as part of a multidimensional measure of quality may make it more appropriate for use with apps focused on teaching and learning, whereas MARS’s more general rating of quality may be more appropriate for health apps targeting a general health audience. Ratings of the 9 apps by both measures also highlighted the variable quality of clinical skills mobile apps for learning. CLINICALTRIAL

Learning technology in health professions education: Realising an (un)imagined future

“…1,2 By "learning technologies," we refer to digital technologies that are used for teaching and learning. They include, for instance, learning management systems that have become widespread and essential for many institutions, 3 lecture capture and live streaming applications, 4 learning analytics solutions, 5 mobile or web-based applications for self-paced or supplementary learning 6,7 and virtual reality and artificial intelligence applications. 8 Such a definition of learning technologies is inherently broad, encompassing a wide range of digital applications but primarily focusing on computer-based solutions, not those requiring additional artefacts such as manikin or clinical skills laboratories.…”