{rfName}
Mo

Indexed in

License and use

Icono OpenAccess

Citations

125

Altmetrics

Analysis of institutional authors

Mandracchia, FlorianaAuthorLlauradó EAuthorTarro LCorresponding AuthorValls RmAuthorSola RAuthor

Share

Publications
>
Article

Mobile Phone Apps for Food Allergies or Intolerances in App Stores: Systematic Search and Quality Assessment Using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS)

Publicated to:Jmir Mhealth And Uhealth. 8 (9): e18339- - 2020-09-16 8(9), DOI: 10.2196/18339

Authors: Mandracchia, Floriana; Llaurado, Elisabet; Tarro, Lucia; Valls, Rosa Maria; Sola, Rosa

Affiliations

EURECAT Technol Ctr Catalonia, Unit Nutr & Hlth, Reus, Spain - Author
Eurecat, Technology Centre of Catalonia - Author
Hosp Univ St Joan Reus, Reus, Spain - Author
Univ Rovira & Virgili, Fac Med & Ciencies Salut, Hlth Environm Chair, Funct Nutr Oxidat & Cardiovasc Dis Grp NFOC Salut, C St Llorenc 21, Reus, Spain - Author
Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Facultat de Medicina i Ciencies de la Salut - Author
University Hospital Sant Joan de Reus - Author
See more

Abstract

©Floriana Mandracchia, Elisabet Llauradó, Lucia Tarro, Rosa Maria Valls, Rosa Solà. Originally published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth (http://mhealth.jmir.org), 16.09.2020. BACKGROUND: Food allergies and intolerances are increasing worldwide, and mobile phone apps could be a promising tool for self-management of these issues. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systemically search and assess food allergy or intolerance apps in app stores using the multidimensional Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) to rate the objective and subjective quality and to identify critical points for future improvements. METHODS: This systematic search identified apps through the keywords food allergy, food intolerance, and allergens in English, Spanish, and Italian in the Apple App Store (iOS) and Google Play Store (Android). The inclusion criteria were a user star rating of ≥3 (of 5 stars) to limit the selection to the most highly rated apps; ≥1000 reviews as an indicator of reliability; and the most recent update performed up to 2017. Then, the apps were divided according to their purpose (searching for allergen-free food products, restaurants, or recipes in meal planners) and evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 points using the MARS in terms of (1) app classification category with a descriptive aim; (2) app subjective and objective quality categories comprised of engagement, functionality, esthetics, and information sections (Medline was searched for eligible apps to check whether they had been tested in trials); and (3) an optional app-specific section. Furthermore, the output and input features were evaluated. Differences between MARS sections and between app purposes and correlations among MARS sections, star ratings, and numbers of reviews were evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 1376 apps identified, 14 were included: 12 related to food allergies and intolerances that detect 2-16 food allergens and 2 related only to gluten intolerance. The mean (SD) MARS scores (maximum 5 points) were 3.8 (SD 0.4) for objective quality, highlighting whether any app had been tested in trials; 3.5 (SD 0.6) for subjective quality; and 3.6 (SD 0.7) for the app-specific section. Therefore, a rating ≥3 points indicated overall acceptable quality. From the between-section comparison, engagement (mean 3.5, SD 0.6) obtained significantly lower scores than functionality (mean 4.1, SD 0.6), esthetics (mean 4, SD 0.5), and information (mean 3.8, SD 0.4). However, when the apps were compared by purpose, critical points were identified: meal planner apps showed significantly higher engagement (mean 4.1, SD 0.4) than food product (mean 3.0, SD 0.6; P=.05) and restaurant (mean 3.2, SD 0.3; P=.02) apps. CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic search of food allergy or intolerance apps, acceptable MARS quality was identified, although the engagement section for food product and restaurant purpose apps should be improved and the included apps should be tested in trials. The critical points identified in this systematic search can help improve the innovativeness and applicability of future food allergy and intolerance apps.

Keywords

allergensehealth.food allergyfood hypersensitivityfood intolerancemhealthmobile applicationsAllergensCell phoneConsumersDiagnosisEhealthEhealth.Food allergyFood hypersensitivityFood intoleranceHealth-careHumansImpactItalyManagementMhealthMobile applicationsMobile healthReproducibility of resultsStateStrategies

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

The work has been published in the journal Jmir Mhealth And Uhealth due to its progression and the good impact it has achieved in recent years, according to the agency WoS (JCR), it has become a reference in its field. In the year of publication of the work, 2020, it was in position 17/107, thus managing to position itself as a Q1 (Primer Cuartil), in the category Health Care Sciences & Services.

From a relative perspective, and based on the normalized impact indicator calculated from World Citations provided by WoS (ESI, Clarivate), it yields a value for the citation normalization relative to the expected citation rate of: 2.62. This indicates that, compared to works in the same discipline and in the same year of publication, it ranks as a work cited above average. (source consulted: ESI Nov 14, 2024)

This information is reinforced by other indicators of the same type, which, although dynamic over time and dependent on the set of average global citations at the time of their calculation, consistently position the work at some point among the top 50% most cited in its field:

  • Weighted Average of Normalized Impact by the Scopus agency: 1.8 (source consulted: FECYT Feb 2024)
  • Field Citation Ratio (FCR) from Dimensions: 33.97 (source consulted: Dimensions Jun 2025)

Specifically, and according to different indexing agencies, this work has accumulated citations as of 2025-06-23, the following number of citations:

  • WoS: 42
  • Scopus: 50
  • Europe PMC: 33
  • OpenCitations: 49

Impact and social visibility

From the perspective of influence or social adoption, and based on metrics associated with mentions and interactions provided by agencies specializing in calculating the so-called "Alternative or Social Metrics," we can highlight as of 2025-06-23:

  • The use, from an academic perspective evidenced by the Altmetric agency indicator referring to aggregations made by the personal bibliographic manager Mendeley, gives us a total of: 113.
  • The use of this contribution in bookmarks, code forks, additions to favorite lists for recurrent reading, as well as general views, indicates that someone is using the publication as a basis for their current work. This may be a notable indicator of future more formal and academic citations. This claim is supported by the result of the "Capture" indicator, which yields a total of: 113 (PlumX).

With a more dissemination-oriented intent and targeting more general audiences, we can observe other more global scores such as:

  • The Total Score from Altmetric: 7.2.
  • The number of mentions on the social network X (formerly Twitter): 9 (Altmetric).

It is essential to present evidence supporting full alignment with institutional principles and guidelines on Open Science and the Conservation and Dissemination of Intellectual Heritage. A clear example of this is:

  • The work has been submitted to a journal whose editorial policy allows open Open Access publication.
  • Assignment of a Handle/URN as an identifier within the deposit in the Institutional Repository: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11797/imarina8680277

Leadership analysis of institutional authors

There is a significant leadership presence as some of the institution’s authors appear as the first or last signer, detailed as follows: First Author (Mandracchia, Floriana) and Last Author (Solà Alberich, Rosa Maria).

the author responsible for correspondence tasks has been Tarro Sánchez, Lucía.