%0杂志文章%@ 2291-5222 %I JMIR出版物%V 10%卡塔尔世界杯8强波胆分析 N 9% P e35851 %T血液恶性肿瘤患者的智能手机应用程序:系统评价内容%A Báez Gutiérrez,Nerea %A Rodríguez Ramallo,Héctor %A Fernández González,Marcos %A Abdel-Kader Martín,Laila %+维尔京大学医院Rocío, Avenida Manuel Siurot, s/n，塞维利亚，41013，西班牙，34 688 933 454，hector.rodriguez.sspa@juntadeandalucia.es %K恶性血液病%K移动应用程序%K智能手机%K eHealth %K mHealth %K癌症%K移动应用程序%K移动健康%K血液病%D 2022 %7 20.9.2022 %9原始论文%J JMIR mHealth Uhealth %G英文%X背景:恶性血液病(HMs)是一组异质癌症，是导致发病率和死亡率的重要原因。HMs的年代化和智能手机使用的增加可能会导致患者通过移动健康应用程序来寻求当前未满足的需求。目的:本综述的目的是确定和评估针对诊断为HMs患者的智能手机应用程序的质量。方法:于2021年11月对针对被诊断为HMs的患者、从西班牙IP地址访问、在iOS (App Store)和Android(谷歌Play)平台上可用的应用程序进行了系统搜索。使用的搜索词是“血液学”、“血癌”、“白血病”、“淋巴瘤”和“骨髓瘤”应用程序，使用英语、西班牙语或两种语言。被识别的应用程序由2名审查员独立下载和分析。收集了应用程序的一般特征信息。移动应用评估量表(MARS)用于评估质量。 The resulting parameter of the analyses, the mean score of the apps, was compared by Student t test. Results: Overall, 18 apps were identified; 7 were available on Android, 5 were available on iOS, and 6 were available on both platforms. All included apps were free; 3 were published in 2021, and among the apps published before 2021, only 6 were updated in 2021. Most (16/18, 89%) of the apps were aimed at patients with leukemia or lymphoma (16). The primary purposes of the apps were to provide general information about the condition (16/18, 89%) and monitor symptoms and clinical parameters (11/18, 61%). Health care professionals contributed to the development of 50% (9/18) of apps; 6 were owned and supported by scientific societies, and 3 were developed with the participation of health care professionals. The mean MARS score for the overall quality of the apps was 3.1 (SD 1.0). The engagement and aesthetics subscales were the lowest rated subscales, with only 44% (8/18) and 67% (12/18), respectively, of the apps obtaining acceptable scores. None of the included apps proved clinical efficacy through clinical trials in patients with HMs. Statistically significant differences were found in the MARS scores between operating systems (+1.0, P=.003) in favor of iOS apps. The participation of health care professionals in the development of the apps did not have a statistically significant impact on the MARS scores. Conclusions: This systematic search and evaluation identified few acceptable quality mobile apps for patients with HMs. Current and future apps for patients with HMs should provide evidence-based valuable information, improve user engagement, incorporate functions according to patient preferences, and generate evidence regarding the efficacy of app use by patients with HMs. %M 36125860 %R 10.2196/35851 %U https://mhealth.www.mybigtv.com/2022/9/e35851 %U https://doi.org/10.2196/35851 %U http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36125860