| Title |
Smartphone Apps as a Source of Cancer Information: Changing Trends in Health Information-Seeking Behavior
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Cancer Education, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13187-012-0446-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ambarish Pandey, Sayeedul Hasan, Divyanshu Dubey, Sasmit Sarangi |
| Abstract |
There is an increased interest in smartphone applications as a tool for delivery of health-care information. There have been no studies which evaluated the availability and content of cancer-related smartphone applications. This study aims to identify and analyze cancer-related applications available on the Apple iTunes platform. The Apple iTunes store was searched for cancer-related smartphone applications on July 29, 2011. The content of the applications was analyzed for cost, type of information, validity, and involvement of health-care agencies. A total of 77 relevant applications were identified. There were 24.6 % apps uploaded by health-care agencies, and 36 % of the apps were aimed at health-care workers. Among the apps, 55.8 % provided scientifically validated data. The difference in scientific validity between the apps aimed at general population versus health-care professionals was statistically significant (P < 0.01). Seventy-nine percent of the apps uploaded by health-care agencies were found to be backed by scientific data. There is lack of cancer-related applications with scientifically backed data. There is a need to improve the accountability and reliability of cancer-related smartphone applications and encourage participation by health-care agencies to ensure patient safety. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 43% |
| Singapore | 1 | 14% |
| Italy | 1 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 1 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 57% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 29% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 244 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 1% |
| Malaysia | 2 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 235 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 55 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 42 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 26 | 11% |
| Researcher | 21 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 6% |
| Other | 55 | 23% |
| Unknown | 31 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 60 | 25% |
| Computer Science | 43 | 18% |
| Social Sciences | 29 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 5% |
| Psychology | 12 | 5% |
| Other | 41 | 17% |
| Unknown | 47 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 December 2022.
All research outputs
#2,466,569
of 24,858,211 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cancer Education
#55
of 1,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,105
of 292,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cancer Education
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,858,211 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,271 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 292,281 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.