The App Behavior Change Scale: Creation of a Scale to Assess the Potential of Apps to Promote Behavior Change

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

Using mobile phone apps to promote behavior change is becoming increasingly common. However, there is no clear way to rate apps against their behavior change potential.

Objective

This study aimed to develop a reliable, theory-based scale that can be used to assess the behavior change potential of smartphone apps.

Methods

A systematic review of all studies purporting to investigate app’s behavior change potential was conducted. All scales and measures from the identified studies were collected to create an item pool. From this item pool, 3 health promotion exerts created the App Behavior Change Scale (ABACUS). To test the scale, 70 physical activity apps were rated to provide information on reliability.

Results

The systematic review returned 593 papers, the abstracts and titles of all were reviewed, with the full text of 77 papers reviewed; 50 papers met the inclusion criteria. From these 50 papers, 1333 questions were identified. Removing duplicates and unnecessary questions left 130 individual questions, which were then refined into the 21-item scale. The ABACUS demonstrates high percentage agreement among reviewers (over 80%), with 3 questions scoring a Krippendorff alpha that would indicate agreement and a further 7 came close with alphas >.5. The scale overall reported high interrater reliability (2-way mixed interclass coefficient=.92, 95% CI 0.81-0.97) and high internal consistency (Cronbach alpha=.93).

Conclusions

The ABACUS is a reliable tool that can be used to determine the behavior change potential of apps. This instrument fills a gap by allowing the evaluation of a large number of apps to be standardized across a range of health categories.

Related collections

Most cited references 52

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Reliability in Content Analysis.

Klaus Krippendorff (2004)

0 comments Cited 256 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Apps to promote physical activity among adults: a review and content analysis

Anouk Middelweerd, Julia Mollee, C Natalie van der Wal … (2014)

Background In May 2013, the iTunes and Google Play stores contained 23,490 and 17,756 smartphone applications (apps) categorized as Health and Fitness, respectively. The quality of these apps, in terms of applying established health behavior change techniques, remains unclear. Methods The study sample was identified through systematic searches in iTunes and Google Play. Search terms were based on Boolean logic and included AND combinations for physical activity, healthy lifestyle, exercise, fitness, coach, assistant, motivation, and support. Sixty-four apps were downloaded, reviewed, and rated based on the taxonomy of behavior change techniques used in the interventions. Mean and ranges were calculated for the number of observed behavior change techniques. Using nonparametric tests, we compared the number of techniques observed in free and paid apps and in iTunes and Google Play. Results On average, the reviewed apps included 5 behavior change techniques (range 2–8). Techniques such as self-monitoring, providing feedback on performance, and goal-setting were used most frequently, whereas some techniques such as motivational interviewing, stress management, relapse prevention, self-talk, role models, and prompted barrier identification were not. No differences in the number of behavior change techniques between free and paid apps, or between the app stores were found. Conclusions The present study demonstrated that apps promoting physical activity applied an average of 5 out of 23 possible behavior change techniques. This number was not different for paid and free apps or between app stores. The most frequently used behavior change techniques in apps were similar to those most frequently used in other types of physical activity promotion interventions.

0 comments Cited 214 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Mental Health Mobile Apps for Preadolescents and Adolescents: A Systematic Review

Rebecca Grist, Joanna Porter, Paul Stallard (2017)

Background There are an increasing number of mobile apps available for adolescents with mental health problems and an increasing interest in assimilating mobile health (mHealth) into mental health services. Despite the growing number of apps available, the evidence base for their efficacy is unclear. Objective This review aimed to systematically appraise the available research evidence on the efficacy and acceptability of mobile apps for mental health in children and adolescents younger than 18 years. Methods The following were systematically searched for relevant publications between January 2008 and July 2016: APA PsychNet, ACM Digital Library, Cochrane Library, Community Care Inform-Children, EMBASE, Google Scholar, PubMed, Scopus, Social Policy and Practice, Web of Science, Journal of Medical Internet Research, Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, and OpenGrey. Abstracts were included if they described mental health apps (targeting depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorders, self-harm, suicide prevention, conduct disorder, eating disorders and body image issues, schizophrenia, psychosis, and insomnia) for mobile devices and for use by adolescents younger than 18 years. Results A total of 24 publications met the inclusion criteria. These described 15 apps, two of which were available to download. Two small randomized trials and one case study failed to demonstrate a significant effect of three apps on intended mental health outcomes. Articles that analyzed the content of six apps for children and adolescents that were available to download established that none had undergone any research evaluation. Feasibility outcomes suggest acceptability of apps was good and app usage was moderate. Conclusions Overall, there is currently insufficient research evidence to support the effectiveness of apps for children, preadolescents, and adolescents with mental health problems. Given the number and pace at which mHealth apps are being released on app stores, methodologically robust research studies evaluating their safety, efficacy, and effectiveness is promptly needed.

0 comments Cited 180 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Fiona H McKay:

School of Health and Social DevelopmentDeakin UniversityBurwood HwyBurwood, 3125Australia61 392517183fiona.mckay@deakin.edu.au

ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0498-3572

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

Journal ID (publisher-id): JMU

Title: JMIR mHealth and uHealth

Publisher: JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )

ISSN (Electronic): 2291-5222

Publication date Collection: January 2019

Publication date (Electronic): 25 January 2019

Volume: 7

Issue: 1

Electronic Location Identifier: e11130

Affiliations

[1 ] School of Health and Social Development Deakin University Burwood Australia

Author notes

Corresponding Author: Fiona H McKay fiona.mckay@ 123456deakin.edu.au

Author information

Fiona H McKay http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0498-3572

Sarah Slykerman http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1884-5848

Matthew Dunn http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4615-5078

Article

Publisher ID: v7i1e11130

DOI: 10.2196/11130

PMC ID: 6367670

PubMed ID: 30681967

SO-VID: a38129b7-4e3e-4b07-8b40-e82d0b64546d

License:

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR mhealth and uhealth, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://mhealth.jmir.org/.as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

History

Date received : 24 May 2018

Date revision requested : 4 August 2018

Date revision received : 29 October 2018

Date accepted : 29 October 2018

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Cited by 38

See all cited by

Most referenced authors 756

See all reference authors

Submit your digital health research with an established publisher
- celebrating 25 years of open access