Table 6.
Information assessment of the PainRELife mobile app using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) [37,38] (n=23).
| Information assessment | Response, n (%) | ||||
|
|
Strongly disagree | Disagree | Undecided | Agree | Strongly agree |
| Informationa | 0 | 0 | 5 (22) | 9 (39) | 9 (39) |
| Credibilityb | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (4) | 22 (96) |
| Quality of informationc | 1 (4) | 0 | 2 (9) | 9 (39) | 11 (48) |
| Quantity of informationd | 1 (4) | 0 | 6 (26) | 7 (30) | 9 (39) |
| Visual informatione | 0 | 2 (9) | 1 (4) | 11 (48) | 9 (39) |
| Goalsf | 2 (9) | 0 | 7 (30) | 11 (48) | 3 (13) |
a”Contains high-quality information (eg, text, feedback, measures, references) from a credible source.“
b“Does the app come from a legitimate source (specified in app store description or within the app itself)?”
c“Is app content correct, well written, and relevant to the goal/topic of the app?”
d”Is the extent of coverage within the scope of the app and comprehensive but concise?”
e“Is the visual explanation of concepts—through charts/graphs/images/videos, etc—clear, logical, correct?”
f”Does app have specific, measurable, and achievable goals (specified in the app store description or within the app itself)?”