Home
|
Inbox
|
Search
|
View Abstract
Lung Cancer in the Palm of Our Hands- A Critical Appraisal of iOS Medical Applications Available
Description
.abstract img { width:300px !important; height:auto; display:block; text-align:center; margin-top:10px } .abstract { overflow-x:scroll } .abstract table { width:100%; display:block; border:hidden; border-collapse: collapse; margin-top:10px } .abstract td, th { border-top: 1px solid #ddd; padding: 4px 8px; } .abstract tbody tr:nth-child(even) td { background-color: #efefef; } .abstract a { overflow-wrap: break-word; word-wrap: break-word; }
A5992 - Lung Cancer in the Palm of Our Hands- A Critical Appraisal of iOS Medical Applications Available
Author Block: L. Kallur1, A. Ataya2, H. L. Paz y Mar3, A. Gonzalez-Estrada4; 1Internal Medicine, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN, United States, 2University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States, 3Case Western Reserve MetroHealth, Cleveland, OH, United States, 4Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, United States.
RATIONALE: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths among men and woman in the United States. Studies have demonstrated that up to 35% of Americans use the Internet to obtain medical information. There is currently no standardized quality control of information in healthcare related applications (apps), which can result in inaccurate education and unnecessary anxiety. We analyzed all the lung cancer apps available at the Itunes store in order to identify applications that provide scientific and useful information for users.
METHODS: The term “lung cancer” was searched between March 20 - April 20, 2017 resulting in 107 apps available to download. Thirty-two apps were excluded (unrelated to subject, foreign language). Apps were analyzed for category of subject, source, social medial availability, price and membership requirements.
RESULTS: A total of 75 lung cancer apps were analyzed. The most common app source included: private companies (38.6%), medical journals (22.6%), and non-profit organizations (12.0%). Most apps were intended for medical professional education (54.7%), patient education (34.6%), and personal login apps for active clinical trials (5.3%). Around 20% of all apps required payment with a median price of $3.62 ($0.99 - 9.99). We found that 14.6% apps were exclusive in requiring mandatory membership, 9.3% optional membership while 72% apps were free access. Social media was incorporated in 21% of apps, with most popular choice being facebook.
CONCLUSIONS: Greater than half of the apps for lung cancer available are intended for medical professional education rather than patient education. One in five apps required payment for access. There is a clear opportunity for health-care professionals to create more patient centered educational platform via applications. Patients use apps to help track their health but no study has been conducted to analyze the available apps for lung cancer. This study stresses the importance of in-office teaching and guidance regarding accurate social media tools for patient health- information.
Author Block: L. Kallur1, A. Ataya2, H. L. Paz y Mar3, A. Gonzalez-Estrada4; 1Internal Medicine, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN, United States, 2University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States, 3Case Western Reserve MetroHealth, Cleveland, OH, United States, 4Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, United States.
RATIONALE: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths among men and woman in the United States. Studies have demonstrated that up to 35% of Americans use the Internet to obtain medical information. There is currently no standardized quality control of information in healthcare related applications (apps), which can result in inaccurate education and unnecessary anxiety. We analyzed all the lung cancer apps available at the Itunes store in order to identify applications that provide scientific and useful information for users.
METHODS: The term “lung cancer” was searched between March 20 - April 20, 2017 resulting in 107 apps available to download. Thirty-two apps were excluded (unrelated to subject, foreign language). Apps were analyzed for category of subject, source, social medial availability, price and membership requirements.
RESULTS: A total of 75 lung cancer apps were analyzed. The most common app source included: private companies (38.6%), medical journals (22.6%), and non-profit organizations (12.0%). Most apps were intended for medical professional education (54.7%), patient education (34.6%), and personal login apps for active clinical trials (5.3%). Around 20% of all apps required payment with a median price of $3.62 ($0.99 - 9.99). We found that 14.6% apps were exclusive in requiring mandatory membership, 9.3% optional membership while 72% apps were free access. Social media was incorporated in 21% of apps, with most popular choice being facebook.
CONCLUSIONS: Greater than half of the apps for lung cancer available are intended for medical professional education rather than patient education. One in five apps required payment for access. There is a clear opportunity for health-care professionals to create more patient centered educational platform via applications. Patients use apps to help track their health but no study has been conducted to analyze the available apps for lung cancer. This study stresses the importance of in-office teaching and guidance regarding accurate social media tools for patient health- information.
|
Home
|
Inbox
|
Search
|