Mobile Apps Aimed at Preventing and Handling Unintentional Injuries in Children Aged <7 Years: Systematic Review.

caregiver first aid health app injuries mHealth mobile health mobile phone needs parental pediatric prevention review method

Journal

Interactive journal of medical research
ISSN: 1929-073X
Titre abrégé: Interact J Med Res
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101598421

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
06 Sep 2023
Historique:
received: 02 01 2023
accepted: 20 06 2023
revised: 15 06 2023
medline: 6 9 2023
pubmed: 6 9 2023
entrez: 6 9 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Despite various global health crises, the prevention and handling of unintentional childhood injuries remains an important public health objective. Although several systematic reviews have examined the effectiveness of different child injury prevention measures, these reviews did not address the evaluation of mobile communication intervention tools. Whether and how mobile apps were evaluated provides information on the extent to which communication theories, models, and evidence-based knowledge were considered. Previous studies have shown that the effectiveness of mobile apps increases when theories and evidence are considered during their development. This systematic review aimed to identify research on mobile apps dealing with the prevention and handling of unintentional injuries in children and examine the theoretical and methodological approaches thereof. In addition, this review analyzed the different needs of various target groups of the mobile apps described in the articles. In total, 8 electronic databases, ranging from interdisciplinary to medical and technical as well as social sciences databases, were searched for original research articles or brief reports in peer-reviewed journals or conference proceedings. Moreover, this review encompassed a systematic scan of articles published in the BMJ journal Injury Prevention. These steps were followed by a snowball search based on the literature references in the articles identified through the initial screening. The articles had to be written in English or German, published between 2008 and 2021, and evaluate mobile apps dealing with the prevention and handling of unintentional child injuries. The identified 5 studies were analyzed by 5 independent researchers using an inductive approach. Furthermore, the quality of the studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. A total of 5 articles were included and assessed with regard to overall quality of theoretical and methodological foundations, assessed variables, the focal app's architecture, and the needs of the study participants. The overall study quality was moderate, although part of this classification was due to a lack of details reported in the studies. Each study examined 1 mobile app aimed at parents and other caregivers. Each study assessed at least 1 usability- or user experience-related variable, whereas the needs of the included study participants were detailed in only 20% (1/5) of the cases. However, none of the studies referred to theories such as the Technology Acceptance Model during the development of the apps. The future development and evaluation of apps dealing with the prevention and handling of child injuries should combine insights into existing models on user experience and usability with established theories on mobile information behavior. This theory-based approach will increase the validity of such evaluation studies.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Despite various global health crises, the prevention and handling of unintentional childhood injuries remains an important public health objective. Although several systematic reviews have examined the effectiveness of different child injury prevention measures, these reviews did not address the evaluation of mobile communication intervention tools. Whether and how mobile apps were evaluated provides information on the extent to which communication theories, models, and evidence-based knowledge were considered. Previous studies have shown that the effectiveness of mobile apps increases when theories and evidence are considered during their development.
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
This systematic review aimed to identify research on mobile apps dealing with the prevention and handling of unintentional injuries in children and examine the theoretical and methodological approaches thereof. In addition, this review analyzed the different needs of various target groups of the mobile apps described in the articles.
METHODS METHODS
In total, 8 electronic databases, ranging from interdisciplinary to medical and technical as well as social sciences databases, were searched for original research articles or brief reports in peer-reviewed journals or conference proceedings. Moreover, this review encompassed a systematic scan of articles published in the BMJ journal Injury Prevention. These steps were followed by a snowball search based on the literature references in the articles identified through the initial screening. The articles had to be written in English or German, published between 2008 and 2021, and evaluate mobile apps dealing with the prevention and handling of unintentional child injuries. The identified 5 studies were analyzed by 5 independent researchers using an inductive approach. Furthermore, the quality of the studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.
RESULTS RESULTS
A total of 5 articles were included and assessed with regard to overall quality of theoretical and methodological foundations, assessed variables, the focal app's architecture, and the needs of the study participants. The overall study quality was moderate, although part of this classification was due to a lack of details reported in the studies. Each study examined 1 mobile app aimed at parents and other caregivers. Each study assessed at least 1 usability- or user experience-related variable, whereas the needs of the included study participants were detailed in only 20% (1/5) of the cases. However, none of the studies referred to theories such as the Technology Acceptance Model during the development of the apps.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
The future development and evaluation of apps dealing with the prevention and handling of child injuries should combine insights into existing models on user experience and usability with established theories on mobile information behavior. This theory-based approach will increase the validity of such evaluation studies.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37672312
pii: v12i1e45258
doi: 10.2196/45258
pmc: PMC10512123
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Review

Langues

eng

Pagination

e45258

Informations de copyright

©Annett Schulze, Ann-Kathrin Lindemann, Fabian Brand, Johanna Geppert, Axel Menning, Paula Stehr, Doreen Reifegerste, Constanze Rossmann. Originally published in the Interactive Journal of Medical Research (https://www.i-jmr.org/), 06.09.2023.

Références

BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Oct 10;13:405
pubmed: 24112403
J Public Health (Oxf). 2005 Dec;27(4):388-91
pubmed: 16311247
JMIR Pediatr Parent. 2021 Jun 1;4(2):e24156
pubmed: 34061039
Digit Health. 2021 Oct 18;7:20552076211048638
pubmed: 34691754
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2017;240:347-355
pubmed: 28972527
Health (London). 2016 Jan;20(1):49-61
pubmed: 26487686
Inj Prev. 2019 Dec;25(6):546-551
pubmed: 31088897
PLoS One. 2020 Dec 29;15(12):e0243464
pubmed: 33373371
Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2012;22(3):276-82
pubmed: 23092060
J Dent Hyg. 2018 Apr;92(2):6-14
pubmed: 29739842
Inj Prev. 2017 Apr;23(2):138-146
pubmed: 26787740
Am J Emerg Med. 2016 Aug;34(8):1614-9
pubmed: 27321939
JMIR Pediatr Parent. 2019 Mar 14;2(1):e12022
pubmed: 31518322
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2013 May-Jun;9(3):330-8
pubmed: 22695215
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2015;216:467-71
pubmed: 26262094
BMJ. 1996 Jan 13;312(7023):71-2
pubmed: 8555924
Arch Dis Child. 2021 Feb;106(2):e3
pubmed: 32487724
Inj Prev. 2015 Apr;21(e1):e144-52
pubmed: 24871959
J Health Commun. 2018;23(10-11):909-955
pubmed: 30449261
Inj Epidemiol. 2020 Nov 11;7(1):63
pubmed: 33176881
Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2021 Sep;45(9):1853-1863
pubmed: 34487368
BMC Pediatr. 2021 Sep 8;21(Suppl 1):311
pubmed: 34496772
Inj Prev. 2017 Feb;23(1):58
pubmed: 27597399
Am J Prev Med. 2018 Jun;54(6):746-755
pubmed: 29656914
Injury. 2021 May;52(5):1105-1107
pubmed: 33962722
Syst Rev. 2021 Mar 29;10(1):89
pubmed: 33781348
Inj Prev. 2015 Oct;21(5):344-7
pubmed: 25535208
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018 Jul 30;6(7):e10414
pubmed: 30061091
Patient Educ Couns. 2022 Aug;105(8):2721-2730
pubmed: 35537900
Lancet Public Health. 2020 Jun;5(6):e314
pubmed: 32339480
Women Birth. 2016 Aug;29(4):368-75
pubmed: 26874938
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Apr 30;7(4):e11957
pubmed: 31038465
Dent Traumatol. 2016 Dec;32(6):457-463
pubmed: 27140068
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Sep 04;15(9):
pubmed: 30181462
J Med Internet Res. 2016 Oct 31;18(11):e287
pubmed: 27806926
Am Fam Physician. 2006 Dec 1;74(11):1864-9
pubmed: 17168342
J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 Jul;111:49-59.e1
pubmed: 30905698
Evid Based Dent. 2008;9(3):85
pubmed: 18927572
J Public Health (Oxf). 2015 Dec;37(4):671-7
pubmed: 26607757
J Commun Healthc. 2016;9(3):223-231
pubmed: 29051785
Inj Epidemiol. 2018 Mar 12;5(1):5
pubmed: 29527644
Child Care Health Dev. 2020 Mar;46(2):203-212
pubmed: 31782175
Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2014 Jun;57(6):681-6
pubmed: 24863710
J Health Commun. 2012;17 Suppl 3:203-21
pubmed: 23030571
JMIR Pediatr Parent. 2021 Dec 20;4(4):e29731
pubmed: 34932004
JBI Evid Synth. 2022 Jun 01;20(6):1601-1607
pubmed: 35249994
Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2019 Oct;62(10):1174-1183
pubmed: 31529185
Telemed J E Health. 2018 Oct;24(10):727-741
pubmed: 29437546
Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159-74
pubmed: 843571

Auteurs

Annett Schulze (A)

Department of Risk Communication, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Berlin, Germany.

Ann-Kathrin Lindemann (AK)

Department of Risk Communication, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Berlin, Germany.

Fabian Brand (F)

Department of Risk Communication, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Berlin, Germany.

Johanna Geppert (J)

Department of Risk Communication, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Berlin, Germany.

Axel Menning (A)

Department of Risk Communication, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Berlin, Germany.

Paula Stehr (P)

Department of Media and Communication, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany.

Doreen Reifegerste (D)

Department of Prevention and Health Promotion, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.

Constanze Rossmann (C)

Department of Media and Communication, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany.

Classifications MeSH