The Barriers and Facilitators to the Use of Lifestyle Apps: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background: Mobile-health applications are revolutionising the way healthcare is being delivered. However, current research focusses on apps aimed at monitoring of conditions rather than the prevention of disease. Healthcare apps that prevent disease can be classified as lifestyle apps (LAs) and encompass mindfulness, exercise, and diet apps. In order for widespread implementation of these apps, perspectives of the user must be taken into consideration. Therefore, this systematic literature review identifies the barriers and facilitators to the use of LAs from a user’s perspective. Objective: To both identify the facilitators to the use of LAs from a user perspective as well as identify the barriers to the use of LAs from a user perspective. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Qualitative articles focussed on a healthy non-diseased population were obtained. Two independent researchers coded the articles, and themes were identified. Results: Our results found that there were five barriers and five facilitators to app use. The facilitators included (1) motivational aspects to the user, (2) effective marketing and communication, (3) user-centred design and content, (4) humanising technology, and (5) accessibility. The five barriers identified were (1) a non-conducive, (2) poor marketing and branding, (3) controlling and invasive, (4) disengaging content, and (5) inaccessibility. Conclusions: By overcoming the barriers of LAs and encouraging the facilitators found, users are more likely to engage with this method of health promotion. Future research must be conducted on the barriers and facilitators to development and distribution of apps in order for LAs to be implemented in widespread healthcare practice.

Related collections

Most cited references 31

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement

David Moher, Alessandro Liberati, Jennifer Tetzlaff … (2012)

David Moher and colleagues introduce PRISMA, an update of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses

0 comments Cited 5078 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Socioeconomic Disparities in Health Behaviors.

Fred Pampel, Patrick M. Krueger, Justin Denney (2010)

The inverse relationships between socioeconomic status (SES) and unhealthy behaviors such as tobacco use, physical inactivity, and poor nutrition have been well demonstrated empirically but encompass diverse underlying causal mechanisms. These mechanisms have special theoretical importance because disparities in health behaviors, unlike disparities in many other components of health, involve something more than the ability to use income to purchase good health. Based on a review of broad literatures in sociology, economics, and public health, we classify explanations of higher smoking, lower exercise, poorer diet, and excess weight among low-SES persons into nine broad groups that specify related but conceptually distinct mechanisms. The lack of clear support for any one explanation suggests that the literature on SES disparities in health and health behaviors can do more to design studies that better test for the importance of the varied mechanisms.

0 comments Cited 535 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Beyond PICO: the SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis.

Alison Cooke, Debbie Smith, Alison Cooke (2013)

Standardized systematic search strategies facilitate rigor in research. Current search tools focus on retrieval of quantitative research. In this article we address issues relating to using existing search strategy tools, most typically the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) formulation for defining key elements of a review question, when searching for qualitative and mixed methods research studies. An alternative search strategy tool for qualitative/mixed methods research is outlined: SPIDER (Sample, Phenomenon of Interest, Design, Evaluation, Research type). We used both the SPIDER and PICO search strategy tools with a qualitative research question. We have used the SPIDER tool to advance thinking beyond PICO in its suitable application to qualitative and mixed methods research. However, we have highlighted once more the need for improved indexing of qualitative articles in databases. To constitute a viable alternative to PICO, SPIDER needs to be refined and tested on a wider range of topics.