↓ Skip to main content

Health App Use Among US Mobile Phone Users: Analysis of Trends by Chronic Disease Status

Overview of attention for article published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
30 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
209 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
Health App Use Among US Mobile Phone Users: Analysis of Trends by Chronic Disease Status
Published in
JMIR mHealth and uHealth, December 2017
DOI 10.2196/mhealth.7832
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Mobile apps hold promise for serving as a lifestyle intervention in public health to promote wellness and attenuate chronic conditions, yet little is known about how individuals with chronic illness use or perceive mobile apps. The objective of this study was to explore behaviors and perceptions about mobile phone-based apps for health among individuals with chronic conditions. Data were collected from a national cross-sectional survey of 1604 mobile phone users in the United States that assessed mHealth use, beliefs, and preferences. This study examined health app use, reason for download, and perceived efficacy by chronic condition. Among participants, having between 1 and 5 apps was reported by 38.9% (314/807) of respondents without a condition and by 6.6% (24/364) of respondents with hypertension. Use of health apps was reported 2 times or more per day by 21.3% (172/807) of respondents without a condition, 2.7% (10/364) with hypertension, 13.1% (26/198) with obesity, 12.3% (20/163) with diabetes, 12.0% (32/267) with depression, and 16.6% (53/319) with high cholesterol. Results of the logistic regression did not indicate a significant difference in health app download between individuals with and without chronic conditions (P>.05). Compared with individuals with poor health, health app download was more likely among those with self-reported very good health (odds ratio [OR] 3.80, 95% CI 2.38-6.09, P<.001) and excellent health (OR 4.77, 95% CI 2.70-8.42, P<.001). Similarly, compared with individuals who report never or rarely engaging in physical activity, health app download was more likely among those who report exercise 1 day per week (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.6-3.83, P<.001), 2 days per week (OR 4.77, 95% CI 3.27-6.94, P<.001), 3 to 4 days per week (OR 5.00, 95% CI 3.52-7.10, P<.001), and 5 to 7 days per week (OR 4.64, 95% CI 3.11-6.92, P<.001). All logistic regression results controlled for age, sex, and race or ethnicity. Results from this study suggest that individuals with poor self-reported health and low rates of physical activity, arguably those who stand to benefit most from health apps, were least likely to report download and use these health tools.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 209 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 209 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 17%
Student > Master 23 11%
Researcher 17 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 6%
Student > Bachelor 12 6%
Other 40 19%
Unknown 69 33%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 12%
Psychology 26 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 8%
Computer Science 17 8%
Social Sciences 15 7%
Other 28 13%
Unknown 80 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 36. 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 07 January 2022.
All research outputs
#1,413,240
of 33,779,198 outputs
Outputs from JMIR mHealth and uHealth
#179
of 3,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,627
of 491,869 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JMIR mHealth and uHealth
#6
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,779,198 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,055 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 491,869 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.