Mobile applications on app stores for deprescribing: A scoping review

Abstract

Deprescribing is an evidence‐based intervention to reduce potentially inappropriate medication use. Yet its implementation faces barriers including inadequate resources, training and time. Mobile applications (apps) on app stores could address some barriers by offering educational content and interactive features for medication assessment and deprescribing guidance. A scoping review was undertaken to examine existing deprescribing apps, identifying features including interactive and artificial intelligence (AI) elements. A comprehensive search was conducted in August 2023 to identify mobile apps with deprescribing content within the Apple and Google Play Stores. The apps found were screened for inclusion, and data on their features were extracted. Quality assessment was undertaken using the Mobile App Rating Scale. Six deprescribing‐related apps were identified: the American Geriatrics Society Beers Criteria 2023, Dementia Training Australia Medications, Evidence‐Based Medicine Guide, Information Assessment Method Medical Guidelines, MedGPT‐Medical AI App, and Polypharmacy: Manage Medicines. These apps focused primarily on educating both patients/carers and healthcare professionals about deprescribing. Amongst them, two apps included interactive features, with one incorporating AI technology. While these features allowed for search queries and input of patient‐level details, the apps provided limited personalised deprescribing advice. In terms of quality, the apps scored highly on functionality and information, and poorly on engagement and aesthetics. This review found deprescribing apps, despite being educational, have limitations in personalization and user engagement. Future research should prioritize evaluating their feasibility and user experience in clinical settings, and further explore how AI and interactivity could enhance the usefulness of these apps for deprescribing practices.

1. INTRODUCTION

Both inappropriate medication use and polypharmacy can lead to several negative outcomes, including adverse drug reactions which in turn can result in an increased risk of falls and cognitive impairment, hospitalizations and greater healthcare costs. ¹ , ² Potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) are those that pose risks that outweigh potential benefits, especially when there are equally or more effective lower‐risk alternatives. ³ Polypharmacy describes the use of multiple medications, with the commonly accepted definition being the use of five or more medications. ¹ While patients with multiple chronic conditions may require polypharmacy to manage their conditions, it is important to identify inappropriate polypharmacy in clinical practice. ¹

Deprescribing is an evidence‐based intervention to reduce inappropriate polypharmacy and PIMs. ⁴ , ⁵ , ⁶ Deprescribing includes the actions of tapering, discontinuing or withdrawing medications that are either unnecessary and/or present more risks than benefits to patients. ⁷ However, deprescribing is not being implemented as often as it should be. For patients and carers, known barriers include poor familiarity with medications and limited access to resources that help them find information about their medications and facilitate initiating deprescribing‐related conversations with their healthcare professionals (HCPs). ⁸ Barriers to deprescribing by HCPs include lack of time to review medications, insufficient resources and inadequate training. ⁹

The increased use and ownership of mobile devices, particularly smartphones, has transformed how people seek medical information. ¹⁰ There is a high use of smartphones for garnering health‐related information amongst the general population, as well as by HCPs as part of their clinical practice. ¹¹ , ¹² A mobile application or an app is a software program that is designed to be self‐contained and can operate on platforms such as smartphones, computers, tablets as well as other electronic devices and is designed for a particular purpose. ¹⁰ For instance, mobile health apps (mHealth) are designed to improve health‐related outcomes and behaviours. These apps can offer time‐efficient and cost‐effective access to healthcare, ¹³ , ¹⁴ and increase accessibility to health‐related education such as providing deprescribing education to patients and HCPs to help address some of the barriers to deprescribing. ¹⁵ A crucial element to the effectiveness of these digital behaviour change interventions is engagement. ¹⁶ Interactivity is one aspect of engagement and it can be defined as the provision of guidance or personalized feedback/advice based on users' input of information. ¹⁷ Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to enhance this interactivity. AI describes a group of tools that enable digital technology to mimic human intelligence to provide personalized recommendations and virtual assistance. ¹⁸ , ¹⁹

Deprescribing should be a personalized process which takes into account patient health values, goals and clinical history. Therefore, digital tools such as apps that personalize the deprescribing process through the use of interactive and AI features have the potential to improve deprescribing practices. ²⁰ Despite the established evidence for deprescribing to address inappropriate polypharmacy, there remains a gap in the literature regarding the availability of mobile apps, particularly those integrating AI and interactive features, to enhance deprescribing practices. The aims of this scoping review were to (i) summarize the characteristics of available mobile apps in the area of deprescribing and (ii) describe any AI and interactive features in these apps.

2. METHODS

2.1. Design and reporting

A scoping review methodology was employed, adhering to the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. ²¹ The findings were reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA‐ScR). ²² The protocol for this study was registered on Open Science Framework (OSF), registration DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/ZS4N7.

2.2. Search strategy and screening

To identify mobile apps related to deprescribing, searches were conducted on two mobile application platforms: the Apple Store and the Google Play Store. The search was conducted in Australia. Keywords were initially derived from the recommended deprescribing literature search strategy of the US Deprescribing Research Network ²³ and a literature review on mobile apps for medication management. We aimed to balance scientific terminology with patient‐friendly language to capture apps targeted at both HCPs and patients. After conducting test searches, we identified the most relevant and productive terms: “deprescribing”, “polypharmacy”, “drug reduction” and “medication reviewing”. Each term was searched separately in each app store. The search was conducted in August 2023.

The inclusion criteria for this review were: (1) the app was available in English, (2) the app did not focus on selling/advertising a particular product or service, (3) the app could be used to support deprescribing, (4) the app targeted HCPs and/or patients and carers, and (5) the app was available on an iPhone or Android phone. Apps that did not have any content on deprescribing were excluded.

The screening process was undertaken independently by two researchers (L.O. and S.L.) and any disagreements were resolved by discussion with a third researcher (J.T.). For each keyword searched, the title and description of the apps found on the platform were reviewed and assessed for inclusion in the study. Where there was uncertainty on whether to include the app based on the title/app store description, the app was downloaded to determine eligibility. All included apps were then downloaded, and features of the apps were recorded independently by two researchers.

2.3. Data extraction and analysis

The following data were extracted by two independent researchers (L.O. and S.L.) into a pre‐specified template on Microsoft Excel: app name, cost, size, platform on which it was available, creator, country, language, funding, target population, content relating to deprescribing, links to resources, links to AI and any interactive components. To evaluate apps with interactive or AI features related to deprescribing, we conducted hands‐on testing. We tested interactive features by inputting responses or answering the app's questions (e.g. yes/no questions), and evaluated AI features by entering queries related to deprescribing (Supporting Information S1). A narrative synthesis was used to summarize findings on the characteristics of included apps, and any interactive or AI‐related features where present.

2.4. Quality evaluation

The quality of the included apps was assessed based on their functionality using the mobile app rating scale (MARS). ²⁴ The MARS is a validated tool that consists of two primary sections: the first involves the collection of descriptive and technical information about the apps, and the second includes four main quality subscales which are engagement (5 items), functionality (4 items), aesthetic (3 items) and information (7 items), as summarized in Table 1. Each of these items is rated on a 5‐point scale, ranging from inadequate to excellent. The scoring of the four quality subscales of the MARS was undertaken independently by two researchers (L.O. and S.L.). Where there was a difference in score exceeding 2 points on any of the subscale mean scores, the disagreement was discussed and, where needed, resolved with a third researcher (J.T.). As per the MARS creators' scoring instructions, ²⁴ the mean for each of the four subscales was calculated as this approach accounts for the possibility that some items within subscales may be rated as “Not applicable”. An overall mean app quality score was then calculated by averaging the mean scores of the four subscales.

TABLE 1.

Mobile app rating scale (MARS) subscales and components.

MARS subscale	Items	Rating scale
Engagement	Entertainment, Interest, Customization, Interactivity, Target Group	1 (Inadequate) to 5 (Excellent)
Functionality	Performance, Ease of use, Navigation, Gestural design	1 (Inadequate) to 5 (Excellent)
Aesthetics	Layout, Graphics, Visual appeal	1 (Inadequate) to 5 (Excellent)
Information	Accuracy of app description, Goals, Quality of information, Quantity of information, Visual information, Credibility, Evidence base	1 (Inadequate) to 5 (Excellent)

3. RESULTS

In total 1060 apps were identified in the Apple Store (n = 145) and Google Play Store (n = 915). In our screening process, duplicates were identified both between the two app stores and within the search terms used in each app store, resulting in a total of 337 duplicates (331 within the Google Play Store keywords, one within the Apple Store keywords and five between app stores). After removal of duplicates, 723 apps remained for title and description screening (Figure 1). Of these, 708 apps were excluded for the following reasons: 49.3% (n = 349) were not specific to deprescribing; 47.5% (n = 336) were not related to medical purposes; and 3.2% (n = 23) were not available in English. Subsequently, 15 apps were downloaded for content review. Three apps, although downloadable from the respective app stores, were excluded as access to their content required payment which could not be processed in Australia. Following content review, a further six apps were excluded as they were not specific to deprescribing. Finally, six apps that met the eligibility criteria were included in this review.

FIGURE 1.

PRISMA flowchart for mobile applications which facilitate deprescribing.

3.1. Overall characteristics of the mobile apps

The characteristics of the six included apps are summarized in Table 2 and Table S1. Of the included six apps, four were available on both the Apple Store and Google Play Store. All the included mobile apps were exclusively available in the English language. Geographically, three apps originated from the US. Therefore, their content was based on US medical regulations, clinical guidelines and treatment protocols.

TABLE 2.

Characteristics of included mobile applications (in alphabetical order).

App name	Platform on which it is available	Creator, country of origin	Target population	Cost	Deprescribing content	Interactive features present within deprescribing content
AGS Beers Criteria 2023	Apple Store, Google Play Store	American Geriatrics Society, USA	Healthcare professionals, patients/ carers	US$16.49 subscription per year after 2 weeks free trial	PIMs in older adults: lists potentially inappropriate drugs and their risks PIMs for specific diseases: lists drugs that may be inappropriate for particular diseases/conditions Drugs to use with caution: explains why certain drugs require careful use Drug–drug interactions: potential interactions and advice for management PIMs due to reduced kidney function: medications that may be inappropriate for patients with poor renal function Drugs with anticholinergic properties: a list of drugs with anticholinergic properties	No
DTA Medications	Apple Store, Google Play Store	Western Australian Dementia Training Centre, School of Pharmacy, Curtin University, Australia	Healthcare professionals caring for people with dementia	Free	Strategies for antipsychotic medications use and guidelines on choosing the right antipsychotic and determining the appropriate dose Detailed withdrawal plans and gradual dose adjustment advice Suggestions to facilitate the deprescribing of antipsychotics when needed List of medications that may adversely affect cognition and could therefore be potentially discontinued. The list of medications has been divided into high‐risk and low‐risk categories based on the extent of impact on cognition	No
Evidence Based Medicine Guide	Apple Store, Google Play Store	Skyscape Medpresso Inc., USA	Healthcare professionals	US$199.99 for full access	Medication necessity: guidance on the evaluation of the benefits vs. harms of medications Reducing polypharmacy: guidance on the withdrawal of inappropriate medications based on patients' circumstances Inappropriate meds for older adults: list of medications which could be potentially harmful in older adults	No
IAM Medical Guidelines	Apple Store, Google Play Store	Bruyere Research Institute, University of Sydney, NHMRC Cognitive Decline Partnership centre, Canada	Healthcare professionals	Free	Deprescribing section with five drug classes: antihyperglycemics, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, cholinesterase inhibitors and memantines as well as proton pump inhibitors Guidelines on appropriate medication actions after answering a range of yes/no questions. The recommendations are provided based on patient's symptoms and medication indications Resources for symptom management during deprescribing	Yes
MedGPT‐Medical AI App (Early Access)	Google Play Store	ChatGPT API, USA	Healthcare professionals, patients/carers	Free	The user interface features a chat box where users input queries and receive AI‐generated responses When a search enquiry for “deprescribing” was entered, the app's response included an explanation of deprescribing, its importance, and stressed consulting with HCPs before discontinuing any medications When provided with a list of medications for an older patient, the app's response included identification of potential indications and side effects for the listed drugs. The response did not include information about any drug–drug interactions within the list or suggest any alternatives to drug therapy. There was also no specific deprescribing advice or steps provided in the response.	Yes
Polypharmacy: Manage Medicines	Apple Store	Effective Prescribing and Therapeutic Branch within Scottish government, DHI, NHS Greater Glasgow, Clyde Library Network, Tactuum Ltd, Scotland	Healthcare professionals, patients/carers	Free	Healthcare professionals' toolkit: 7‐step guide on addressing and preventing inappropriate polypharmacy. Comprehensive “Medicines” section discussing various medications and the implications of their long‐term use Patients and carers' toolkit: Educates on the importance of medication reviews in clinical care Includes a user‐friendly “My Medicines” feature, allowing the addition and tracking of personal medications	No

Abbreviations: AGS: American Geriatric Society, AI: artificial intelligence, API: application programming interface, Apps: applications, DHI: Digital Health and Care Institute, DTA: Dementia Training Australia, GPT: generative pre‐trained transformer, IAM: information assessment method, Meds: medications, NHMRC: National Health and Medical Research Council, NHS: National Health Service, PIM: potentially inappropriate medications.

One app was developed in Australia based on Australian clinical guidelines for deprescribing and medication management. The majority of the apps (n = 4) offered free access. The two apps that required payment were the “Evidence Based Medicine Guide” app (one‐time payment of US$199.99 for full access), and the “AGS Beers Criteria 2023” app (offered as a two‐week free trial and subsequent annual fee of US$16.49). Three of the apps targeted HCPs. Amongst these, two apps targeted HCPs from various specialty areas, while the “DTA Medications” app was designed specifically for HCPs caring for individuals with dementia. The other three apps targeted both HCPs and patients/carers.

3.2. Deprescribing content of mobile apps

3.2.1. Diseases and drug classes

Overall, all six apps predominantly focussed on educating patients and HCPs about deprescribing and its importance in reducing PIMs. Four apps provided deprescribing content which included general advice on deprescribing for a broad range of drug classes and patient populations (Table 2 and Table S1). The remaining two apps provided deprescribing content and education on specific drug classes or diseases. The “DTA Medications” app focused on the deprescribing of antipsychotics in patients with dementia. This app did not include content on any other drug classes or patient populations. The “IAM Medical Guidelines” app provided advice on deprescribing for five specific classes of medications as summarized in Table 2.

3.2.2. Source of deprescribing information

Four of the six apps were developed by government organizations and used published references to guide their deprescribing advice. The “IAM Medical Guidelines” app included guidelines and algorithms from deprescribing.org which is a resource specifically designed to support HCPs in withdrawing/reducing medications that may be harmful or no longer needed. The “AGS Beers Criteria 2023” app implements the guidelines from the recently updated Beers Criteria for PIMs use in older adults, from the American Geriatrics Society (AGS). Two apps used references such as journal articles and therapeutic guidelines to guide their advice. The “Evidence Based Medicine Guide” app utilized references such as journal articles to provide information and advice on deprescribing; however, it was developed by a commercial organization. The “MedGPT‐Medical AI App (Early Access)” was the only app that did not utilize any deprescribing guidelines or resources as a reference. This app had no referenced sources for the content provided within the app.

3.3. Interactivity and AI technology within mobile apps

Two apps utilized interactive functionalities specifically within the deprescribing content of the app. One of these apps also incorporated AI technology. The app titled “IAM Medical Guidelines” included personalized feedback on the appropriateness of deprescribing, based on responses to a set of binary (yes or no) questions related to the patient's symptoms and medication indications. Following this input, the app provided sequential advice on deprescribing, detailing steps such as medication tapering and management of potential withdrawal symptoms, including guidance on handling withdrawal from medications like benzodiazepines. The interactivity was confined to a range of yes‐or‐no questions, which must be answered before any deprescribing advice is provided and no specific patient details could be inputted into the app, e.g. age, renal function, hepatic function.

The app titled “MedGPT‐Medical AI App (Early Access)” used AI technology to address queries submitted by users via its search box feature. While not exclusively designed for deprescribing, the search box could be used to enter deprescribing‐related queries, as described in Supporting Information S1 and Table S1. The AI‐generated feedback was broad and lacked specific guidance on medication discontinuation or tapering processes. When patient‐specific details including age and a complete medications list were provided prior to inquiring about deprescribing advice, the app provided a definition of deprescribing and a general commentary on its appropriateness. The app did not tailor the advice according to the individual patient data included in the query such as the patient's concurrent medications and potential drug–drug interactions. Two other apps had interactive features for content unrelated to deprescribing.

3.4. MARS app quality scores

The four MARS subscale scores (engagement, functionality, aesthetics and information) and the overall app quality scores are presented in Table 3. The overall MARS objective quality mean (SD) score was 4.0 (0.4) out of 5 with a range from 3.4 (0.7) to 4.5 (0.3). Overall, the apps scored the highest in the functionality domain with a mean (SD) score of 4.7 (0.2), followed by the information domain with a mean (SD) score of 4.2 (0.6).

TABLE 3.

Mobile application rating scale (MARS) mean scores.

App name	MARS engagement Mean score	MARS functionality mean score	MARS aesthetics mean score	MARS information mean score	Overall mean app quality score
AGS Beers Criteria 2023	3.0	5.0	4.0	4.8	4.2 (0.8)
DTA Medications	3.0	5.0	3.7	4.6	4.1 (0.8)
Evidence Based Medicine Guide	3	4.5	3.3	4	3.7 (0.6)
IAM Medical Guidelines	3.6	4.5	3.7	4.2	4.0 (0.4)
MedGPT‐Medical AI App (Early Access)	2.6	4.5	3.3	3.0	3.4 (0.7)
Polypharmacy: Manage Medicines	4.0	4.8	4.7	4.7	4.5 (0.3)
Overall app scores, mean (SD)	3.2 (0.5)	4.7 (0.2)	3.8 (0.5)	4.2 (0.6)	4.0 (0.4)

Abbreviations: AGS: American Geriatrics Society, AI: artificial intelligence, App: application, DTA: Dementia Training Australia, GPT: generative pre‐trained transformer, IAM: information assessment method, MARS: mobile application rating scale, SD: standard deviation.

In terms of functionality, all apps operated efficiently, with minor limitations observed during their use. This included fast functionality of buttons/menus, and easy and logical navigation between screens. The “IAM Medical Guidelines” app presented a challenge with its search function where users were unable to retrieve information by entering the name of a drug from one of the five classes featured in the app. Instead, the search bar only yielded results when the specific drug class was searched. The “MedGPT‐Medical AI App (Early Access)” showed occasional delays in response times. The “Polypharmacy: Manage Medicines” app functioned smoothly, though there was a time delay when downloading the separate toolkits for HCPs and patients/carers.

In terms of the information, four of the apps were developed by government organizations. Three of these apps, including “IAM Medical Guidelines”, “Polypharmacy: Manage Medicines” and “AGS Beers Criteria 2023”, were created by nationally recognized government organizations, as summarized in the creator section of Table 2. The “IAM Medical Guidelines” app has also been evaluated for both acceptability and user satisfaction in a recent study. ²⁵ The study found consistent user engagement, reflected by the number of app downloads and active users on the platform, and the majority of surveyed users reported that the content was engaging and informative. ²⁵ The “DTA Medications” app was created by Dementia Training Australia which is a government organization. The “Evidence Based Medicine Guide” app and “MedGPT‐Medical AI App (Early Access)” were the products of commercial institutions.

The “Polypharmacy: Manage Medicines” app had the highest overall mean (SD) quality score (4.5 (0.3)) amongst the six apps. This app scored the highest for MARS engagement (mean score 4.0) and aesthetics (mean score 4.7). These high scores were due to its interactive features, including the ability for patients to input their medications and the inclusion of informative videos and accessible links to resources for additional information. Its favourable aesthetic features were the use of colour and images to enhance features and menu options.

The “MedGPT‐Medical AI App (Early Access)” had the lowest MARS overall mean (SD) quality score (3.4 (0.7)), and the lowest mean score for information (3.0) and engagement (2.6). This is because all sources of information provided by the app were AI‐generated. The accuracy and legitimacy of the source of information could not be verified via links or supplementary resources. Although the use of AI‐generated responses can increase user interactivity, this app did not offer any other strategies to increase user engagement as it only provided the option for users to input questions in the search bar to receive AI‐generated responses.

4. DISCUSSION

4.1. Summary of findings

This is the first scoping review to examine available mobile apps in the area of deprescribing and assess any AI and interactive features within these apps. We identified six apps that provided deprescribing‐related information. Amongst these six apps, there were two apps that included interactive and/or AI features.

Our findings suggest that deprescribing mobile apps are available and may potentially address barriers such as limited access to guidelines and educational resources. ⁹ Four apps included evidence‐based deprescribing guidelines within their content, thereby improving accessibility to these guidelines. Given the known barrier of limited patient educational materials, ⁸ three apps targeted towards patients and carers offered educational materials that could help address this gap. While apps offer accessible information and potential solutions to these challenges, their integration into clinical practice requires active engagement from healthcare providers and consumers.

4.2. AI and interactive features

Effective medication management requires advice that is tailored to a patient's unique health circumstances to ensure the delivery of a personalized medication management plan. ²⁶ We found currently available apps, such as the “IAM Medical Guidelines” app, are limited in their ability to provide personalized suggestions. The app does not allow the input of health data, such as patient age, renal function and liver function. ²⁶ This is particularly significant for older individuals, as the changes in pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics associated with ageing increase the potential for adverse reactions and harmful drug interactions. ²⁷ , ²⁸ Therefore, although HCPs can use this app as an evidence‐based tool to guide deprescribing practices, the use of additional resources may be required to further tailor their deprescribing advice.

The use of AI technology is another way to increase interactivity and personalization. ¹⁸ , ¹⁹ AI technology can analyse clinical data and patient information, assisting with the processing and interpretation of information. This capability allows AI to offer personalized advice and feedback tailored to individuals. AI can also enhance user engagement by providing real‐time responses to user queries. While the “MedGPT‐Medical AI App (Early Access)” app is useful for education, its AI capabilities lack personalization and raise concerns about information credibility, accuracy and reliability, limiting its suitability for clinical integration.

Effective deprescribing should also consider individual goals, values, life expectancy and level of functioning. ²⁰ While the “IAM Medical Guidelines” app utilizes its interactive features to assess some of the clinical aspects of these considerations, there is no evaluation of the psychological impacts of deprescribing based on individual goals. The “Polypharmacy: Manage Medicines” app, briefly outlines “what matters to the patient” as one of the first steps in deprescribing, but lacks deprescribing‐related interactive content, resulting in generalized advice.

While two reviewed apps incorporate interactive and/or AI features, there is a clear need for tools providing personalized patient care. ²⁹ AI‐based mobile apps can enhance personalization by learning from large volumes of healthcare data input to tailor content to individual needs. ³⁰ , ³¹ Their effectiveness as independent tools in clinical practice requires further investigation.

4.3. Addressing gaps which prevent deprescribing

Limited access to deprescribing guidelines and educational tools has been identified as a significant barrier to the practice of deprescribing. ³² Evidence‐based deprescribing guidelines can streamline the decision‐making process for HCPs. ³³ Four of the apps assessed in this review have been developed by credible organizations, and incorporate deprescribing guidelines and links to resources such as publications. These apps may be useful in overcoming the accessibility issues associated with deprescribing resources. However, the design and objectives of clinical guidelines can differ depending on the healthcare infrastructure and health‐related policies within a country. ³⁴ Most of the evaluated apps originated from the US. Integration of mobile apps into clinical practice requires evaluation within specific healthcare contexts. ³⁵ For example, the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) developed a guideline titled “Evidence standards framework for digital health technologies: user guide” for evaluating the effectiveness, safety, usability and cost‐effectiveness of digital health technologies in healthcare settings. ³⁶

Patient empowerment and education in deprescribing are limited. ⁸ Three of the apps found in this review are targeted towards patients/carers, with “Polypharmacy: Manage Medicines” standing out for its visual appeal and accessible language. The “MedGPT‐Medical AI App (Early Access)” app allows AI‐generated responses to patient queries but lacks educational sections. The “AGS Beers Criteria 2023” app caters to HCPs but has limited content for patients. Efforts to empower patients in deprescribing need further enhancement and consideration of health literacy.

4.4. Strengths and limitations

Strengths of our review include independent screening, data extraction and MARS scoring by two researchers. We assessed both the availability and characteristics of mobile apps as well as their quality using the MARS scoring tool.

Limitations include the review's focus on English‐language apps in Apple and Google Play stores. Apps in other languages or alternative stores (e.g. Amazon App Store) may have been overlooked. Our review only included apps available on mobile phones, excluding those exclusively available on websites, tablets, iPads, computers or other electronic devices. This review conducted searches on app stores in Australia; however, app availability can vary by country, which may have affected our ability to access or purchase certain apps. While we tested and refined search terms, and used a comprehensive range based on deprescribing literature and patient‐friendly language, variations in app store algorithms and terminology could have influenced the retrieval of relevant apps.

4.5. Future research directions

This scoping review provides a comprehensive overview of the availability and characteristics of mobile apps that facilitate deprescribing, but further studies are required to assess their efficacy and usability in healthcare settings. Future research should focus on clinical feasibility, examining how these apps can facilitate deprescribing and address inappropriate polypharmacy.

5. CONCLUSIONS

Limited access to evidence‐based guidance and insufficient resources for patient education and empowerment are major barriers to implementing deprescribing in clinical contexts. Mobile apps that are designed to facilitate deprescribing could potentially bridge these gaps and streamline the deprescribing process. While these apps offer some interactivity to personalize deprescribing for patients, there is a gap in the availability of tools that consider both clinical and psychological facets of patient care as well as health literacy for diverse populations. There needs to be further investigation to assess the practical implementation of mobile apps for deprescribing in clinical settings, accounting for specific healthcare infrastructure and policies.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Lina Okati: Study concept and design; data acquisition, data analysis and interpretation; writing and critical revision of the manuscript. Sarita Lo: Study concept and design; data acquisition; data analysis and interpretation; critical revision of the manuscript. Danijela Gnjidic: Study concept and designl data analysis and interpretation; critical revision of the manuscript. Susan Jiayu Li: Study concept and design; data analysis and interpretation; critical revision of the manuscript. Janani Thillainadesan: Study concept and design; data acquisition; data analysis and interpretation; writing and critical revision of the manuscript.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Supporting information

Table S1. Detailed characteristics of mobile applications.

Okati L, Lo S, Gnjidic D, Li SJ, Thillainadesan J. Mobile applications on app stores for deprescribing: A scoping review. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2025;91(1):55‐65. doi: 10.1111/bcp.16191

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Data available on request from the authors.