Skip to main content
. 2020 Apr 8;3(1):e17136. doi: 10.2196/17136

Table 5.

Secondary selection feature summary of the evaluated communication apps (cApps; note: as the percentages were rounded, some categories may not add up to 100%.

Secondary feature 2015 review 2017 replication review Change over time, (%)d

AACa (n=23), n (%) Translation (n=4), n (%) AAC (n=25)b, n (%) Translation (n=17)c, n (%) AAC Translation
Cost in Can $ (low cost: app <Can $100 [US $75.5])

Free 4 (17) 2 (50) 10 (40) 15 (88) 135 76

<$25 (US $18.9) 2 (9) 2 (50) 6 (24) 2 (12) 167 −76

$25-$49 (US $18.9-US $37) 7 (30) 0 (0) 4 (16) 0 (0) −47 0

$50-$75 (US $18.9-US $37.8) 1 (4) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) −100 0

$75-$100 (US $37.8-US $75.5) 3 (13) 0 (0) 1 (4) 0 (0) −69 0

>$100 (US $75.5) 6 (26) 0 (0) 4 (16) 0 (0) −38 0
In the marketplace for at least two years (longevity/stability)e 18 (78) 3 (75) 19 (76) 13 (76) −3 1
Web and offline capabilitiesf 13 (57) 1 (25) 25 (100) 17 (100) 75 300
Technical support (email, phone, web) 22 (96) 3 (75) 25 (100) 16 (94) 4 25
Includes a translation function 3 (13) N/Ag 1 (4) N/A −69 N/A
No cost/low cost for additional languages N/A 4 (100) N/A 17 (100) N/A 0

aAAC: augmentative and alternative communication.

bIn total, 11 AAC apps were evaluated in both the 2015 review and in the 2017 review.

cIn total, 3 translation apps were evaluated in the 2015 review and in the 2017 review.

dA negative percentage indicates a decrease in the percentage of cApps with the secondary feature over the 2-year period.

eThe app copyright date was used to document marketplace longevity. In the absence of a copyright date, the oldest software update date was used.

fFunctions/features available offline may be limited compared with the features available during app use over the web.

gNot applicable.