@Article{信息:doi 10.2196 / /移动医疗。4334，作者=“Chen, Juliana and Cade, Janet E and Allman-Farinelli, Margaret”，标题=“最受欢迎的智能手机减肥应用程序:质量评估”，期刊=“JMIR mHealth uHealth”，年份=“2015”，月份=“12月”，日期=“16”，卷=“3”，数量=“4”，页数=“e104”，关键词=“行为改变技术;评估;肥胖;质量;智能手机应用程序;背景:移动电话技术的进步使得智能手机能够运行应用程序。大量与健康和健身相关的智能手机应用程序的可用性，在临床和公共卫生层面上都有潜力促进健康行为的改变和体重管理。然而，目前该领域排名靠前的应用还没有在科学质量和行为理论证据基础上得到广泛的评估。目的:本研究的目的是使用综合质量评估标准评估商业市场上最流行的饮食减肥智能手机应用程序的质量，并量化所采用的行为改变技术(bct)。 Methods: The top 200-rated Health {\&} Fitness category apps from the free and paid sections of Google Play and iTunes App Store in Australia (n=800) were screened in August 2014. To be included in further analysis, an app had to focus on weight management, include a facility to record diet intake (self-monitoring), and be in English. One researcher downloaded and used the eligible apps thoroughly for 5 days and assessed the apps against quality assessment criteria which included the following domains: accountability, scientific coverage and content accuracy of information relevant to weight management, technology-enhanced features, usability, and incorporation of BCTs. For inter-rater reliability purposes, a second assessor provided ratings on 30{\%} of the apps. The accuracy of app energy intake calculations was further investigated by comparison with results from a 3-day weighed food record (WFR). Results: Across the eligible apps reviewed (n=28), only 1 app (4{\%}) received full marks for accountability. Overall, apps included an average of 5.1 (SD 2.3) out of 14 technology-enhanced features, and received a mean score of 13.5 (SD 3.7) out of 20 for usability. The majority of apps provided estimated energy requirements (24/28, 86{\%}) and used a food database to calculate energy intake (21/28, 75{\%}). When compared against the WFR, the mean absolute energy difference of apps which featured energy intake calculations (23/28, 82{\%}) was 127 kJ (95{\%} CI -45 to 299). An average of 6.3 (SD 3.7) of 26 BCTs were included. Conclusions: Overall, the most popular commercial apps for weight management are suboptimal in quality, given the inadequate scientific coverage and accuracy of weight-related information, and the relative absence of BCTs across the apps reviewed. With the limited regulatory oversight around the quality of these types of apps, this evaluation provides clinicians and consumers an informed view of the highest-quality apps in the current popular app pool appropriate for recommendation and uptake. Further research is necessary to assess the effectiveness of apps for weight management. ", issn="2291-5222", doi="10.2196/mhealth.4334", url="http://mhealth.www.mybigtv.com/2015/4/e104/", url="https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.4334", url="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26678569" }