Abstract
AbstractGermany introduced prescription-based mobile health (mHealth) apps in October 2020, becoming the first country to offer them fully reimbursed by health insurance. These regulated apps, known as DiGAs, undergo a rigorous approval process similar to pharmaceuticals, including data protection measures and sometimes clinical trials. This study compares the user experience of DiGAs with non-prescription mHealth apps in Germany, analyzing both average app store ratings and written reviews. Our study pioneers the use of BERTopic for sentiment analysis and topic modeling in the mHealth research domain. The dataset comprises 15 DiGAs and 50 comparable apps, totaling 17,588 German-language reviews. Results reveal that DiGAs receive higher contemporary ratings than non-regulated apps (Android: 3.82 vs. 3.77; iOS: 3.78 vs. 3.53; p < 0.01; non-parametric Mann–Whitney–Wilcoxon test). Key factors contributing to positive user experience with DiGAs are customer service and personalization (15%) and ease of use (13%). However, challenges for DiGAs include software bugs (24%) and a cumbersome registration process (20%). Negative user reviews highlight concerns about therapy effectiveness (11%). Excessive pricing is the main concern for the non-regulated group (27%). Data privacy and security receive limited attention from users (DiGAs: 0.5%; comparators: 2%). In conclusion, DiGAs are generally perceived positively based on ratings and sentiment analysis of reviews. However, addressing pricing concerns in the non-regulated mHealth sector is crucial. Integrating user experience evaluation into the review process could improve adherence and health outcomes.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health Information Management,Health Informatics,Computer Science Applications,Medicine (miscellaneous)
Reference57 articles.
1. Grand View Research. mHealth Apps Market Size & Share Report, 2022–2030 (2022).
2. Bates, D. W., Landman, A. & Levine, D. M. Health apps and health policy: what is needed? JAMA 320, 1975–1976 (2018).
3. Plante, T. B. et al. User experience of instant blood pressure: exploring reasons for the popularity of an inaccurate mobile health app. NPJ Digit. Med. 1, 31 (2018).
4. Nwe, K., Larsen, M. E., Nelissen, N. & Wong, D. C. W. Medical mobile app classification using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence evidence standards framework for digital health technologies: interrater reliability study. J. Med. Internet Res. 22, e17457 (2020).
5. Bundesinstitut für Arzneimittel und Medizinprodukte. Das Fast-Track-Verfahren für digitale Gesundheitsanwendungen (DiGA) nach § 139e SGB V. Ein Leitfaden für Hersteller, Leistungserbringer und Anwender. https://www.bfarm.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Medizinprodukte/diga_leitfaden.pdf?__blob=publicationFile (BfArM, 2021).
Cited by
15 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献