You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Development and Validation of the User Version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale (uMARS)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JMIR mHealth and uHealth, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2196/mhealth.5849 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stoyan R Stoyanov, Leanne Hides, David J Kavanagh, Hollie Wilson |
| Abstract |
The Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) provides a reliable method to assess the quality of mobile health (mHealth) apps. However, training and expertise in mHealth and the relevant health field is required to administer it. This study describes the development and reliability testing of an end-user version of the MARS (uMARS). The MARS was simplified and piloted with 13 young people to create the uMARS. The internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the uMARS was then examined in a second sample of 164 young people participating in a randomized controlled trial of a mHealth app. App ratings were collected using the uMARS at 1-, 3,- and 6-month follow up. The uMARS had excellent internal consistency (alpha = .90), with high individual alphas for all subscales. The total score and subscales had good test-retest reliability over both 1-2 months and 3 months. The uMARS is a simple tool that can be reliably used by end-users to assess the quality of mHealth apps. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 36 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 | 6 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 8% |
| Australia | 3 | 8% |
| Canada | 2 | 6% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
| Denmark | 1 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 3% |
| India | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 16 | 44% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 23 | 64% |
| Scientists | 7 | 19% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 11% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 560 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 558 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 92 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 84 | 15% |
| Researcher | 73 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 47 | 8% |
| Other | 24 | 4% |
| Other | 96 | 17% |
| Unknown | 144 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 90 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 88 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 50 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 49 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 25 | 4% |
| Other | 88 | 16% |
| Unknown | 170 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 17 October 2022.
All research outputs
#1,373,238
of 23,917,011 outputs
Outputs from JMIR mHealth and uHealth
#219
of 2,409 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,339
of 349,582 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JMIR mHealth and uHealth
#6
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,917,011 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,409 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 349,582 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.