ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2024
Smartphone pregnancy apps: systematic analysis of features, scientific guidance, commercialization, and user perception.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Awareness, Preferences, and Willingness to Download Pregnancy Health Management Apps Among Women in Louisiana: Cross-Sectional Survey.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Dual-Source Retrieval-Augmented Generation Chatbot for Women's Health (HerCare): Design and Multimethod Evaluation Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Internet use for pregnancy-related information and its correlates among women attending antenatal care in Mogadishu, Somalia.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- The Paradox of Digital Monitoring: A Cross-Sectional Study of mHealth Adoption and Its Association with Psychological Distress Among Pregnant Women in Romania.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Acceptance, Perceived Usefulness, and Data Sharing in Mobile Health Apps Among Patients With Breast Cancer: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.JMIR cancer · 2026Article
- Adherence to digital pregnancy care - lessons learned from the SMART start feasibility study.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Designing, validation and evaluation of an mHealth app for prenatal health promotion based on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology: A mixed methods study protocol.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Exploring user profiles and preferences for mobile apps promoting active lifestyles during pregnancy and postpartum: cross-sectional study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- The mediating role of self-efficacy in the relationship between eHealth literacy and childbirth readiness among pregnant women: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Quality Evaluating Mobile Health Apps for Oral Hygiene Management Using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS): A Systematic Review of Smartphone App Markets.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2025Review
- The Use of "FetalKickApp" for Counting Fetal Movement in Pregnant Women: A Case Study of The University of Port Harcourt Teaching Hospital, Nigeria.Nigerian medical journal : journal of the Nigeria Medical AssociationReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOver 50% of pregnant women use pregnancy applications (apps). Some app s lack credibility, information accuracy, and evidence-based clinical advice, containing potentially harmful functionality. Previous studies have only conducted a limited analysis of pregnancy app functionalities, expert involvement/evidence-based content, used commercialization techniques, and user perception.
methodsWe used the keyword "pregnancy" to scrape (automatically extract) apps and app information from Apple App Store and Google Play. Unique functionalities were derived from app descriptions and user reviews. App descriptions were screened for evidence-based content and expert involvement, and apps were subsequently analyzed in detail. Apps were opened and searched for used commercialization techniques, such as advertisements or affiliate marketing. Automated text analysis (natural language processing) was used on app reviews to assess users' perception of evidence-based content/expert involvement and commercialization techniques.
resultsIn total, 495 apps were scraped. 226 remained after applying exclusion criteria. Out of these, 36 represented 97%/88% of the total market share (Apple App Store/Google Play), and were thus considered for review. Overall, 49 distinct functionalities were identified, out of which 6 were previously unreported. Functionalities for fetal kick movement counting were found. All apps are commercial. Only 15 apps mention the involvement of medical experts. 10.3% of two-stars user reviews include commercial topics, and 0.6% of one-/two-/three-/five stars user reviews include references to scientific content accuracy.
conclusionProblematic features and inadequate advice continue to be present in pregnancy apps. App developers should adopt an evidence-based development approach and avoid implementing as many features as possible, potentially at the expense of their quality or over-complication ("feature creep"). Financial incentives, such as grant programs, could support adequate content quality. Caregivers play a key role in pregnant individuals' decision-making, should be aware of potential dangers, and could guide them to trustworthy apps.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.