Abstract
BACKGROUND: Whilst apps and e-tools have tremendous potential as low-cost, scalable mental health intervention and prevention tools, it is essential that consumers and health professionals have a means by which to evaluate their quality and safety. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to: 1) adapt the original Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) in order to be appropriate for the evaluation of both mobile phone applications as well as e-tools; 2) test the reliability of the revised scale; and 3) develop a quality assurance protocol for identifying and rating new apps and e-tools to determine appropriateness for use in clinical practice. METHODS: The MARS was adapted to include items specific to health-related apps and e-tools, such as the availability of resources, strategies for self-management, and quality information. The 41 apps and e-tools in the standard youth configuration of the InnoWell Platform, a digital tool designed to support or enhance mental health service delivery, were independently rated by two expert raters using the A-MARS. Cronbach's alpha was used to calculate the internal consistency and interclass correlation coefficients were used to calculate interrater reliability. RESULTS: The A-MARS was shown to be a reliable scale with acceptable to excellent internal consistency and moderate to excellent interrater reliability across the subscales. Given the ever-increasing number of health information technologies on the market, a protocol to identify and rate new apps and e-tools for potential clinical use is presented. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst the A-MARS is a useful tool to guide health professionals as they explore available apps and e-tools for potential clinical use, the training, time, and skill required to use it effectively may be prohibitive. As such, health professionals and services are likely to benefit from including a digital navigator as part of the care team to assist in selecting and rating apps and e-tools, increasing the usability of the data, and technology troubleshooting. When selecting, evaluating and/or recommending apps and e-tools to consumers, it is important to consider: 1) the availability of explicit strategies to set, monitor and review SMART goals; 2) the accessibility of credible, user friendly information and resources from reputable sources; 3) evidence of effectiveness; and 4) interoperability with other health information technologies.