Prescribing fitness apps for people with cancer: a preliminary assessment of content and quality of commercially available apps
The benefits of physical activity for cancer survivors are increasingly recognised and smartphone applications are available to assist them to become more physically active. Cancer clinicians, however, lack confidence about which physical activity apps to recommend as evidence on their quality and content is limited. Therefore, we reviewed freely available commercial physical activity/fitness apps to systematically assess their behavioural change content and quality of their design.
Systematic searches of the app stores for Apple and Android operating systems were conducted and apps were screened to identify free apps appropriate for cancer survivors. Quality was assessed using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) and behavioural content was evaluated using the Behavioural Change Techniques Taxonomy (BCTT).
Of 341 apps identified, 67 were judged appropriate for cancer survivors and 46% combined aerobic and strength/stretching content. The overall number of behavioural change techniques (BCT) included was 3.96 (SD = 2.09), with the most frequent being ‘feedback on behaviour’ and ‘goal setting behaviour’. The mean scores for objective and subjective quality were 4.11 (SD = 0.59) and 3.07 (SD = 0.91) respectively (range 0 to 5). Finally, a modest positive correlation was found between the number of BCT and the quality of engagement, awareness and knowledge as assessed by the MARS.
Only a fifth of retrieved physical activity apps contained potentially suitable content for people affected by cancer. Overall, most apps we reviewed appeared to perform well in terms of their objective quality, but less well at promoting knowledge and awareness or help seeking related to physical activity.
Implications for Cancer Survivors
Many physical activity apps are available but the combined use of MARS and BCTT suggests that not all of them are suitable to the needs is a promising and feasible approach for assessing the applicability, usability and content of physical activity of apps employed by cancer survivors and this study is a first step toward developing a guide.
KeywordsPhysical activity Colorectal neoplasms Mobile applications Telemedicine
Compliance with ethical standards
The procedures performed in this study do not require ethical approval.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 1.National Health Service. Physical activity guideline for adults. United Kingdom: National Health Service; 2015. Available at https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/exercise/. Accessed 12 Dec 2018.
- 2.Javaheri PA, Nekolaichuk C, Haennel R, Parliament MB, McNeely ML. Feasibility of a pedometer-based walking program for survivors of breast and head and neck cancer undergoing radiation therapy. Physiother Can. 2015;67(2):205–13. https://doi.org/10.3138/ptc.2014-24O.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 6.Van Zutphen M, Winkels RM, van Duijnhoven FJ, van Harten-Gerritsen SA, Kok DE, van Duijvendijk P, et al. An increase in physical activity after colorectal cancer surgery is associated with improved recovery of physical functioning: a prospective cohort study. BMC Cancer. 2017;17(1):74. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-017-3066-2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 10.Turner RR, Steed L, Quirk H, Greasley RU, Saxton JM, Taylor SJ, et al. Interventions for promoting habitual exercise in people living with and beyond cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;(9):CD010192. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010192.pub3.
- 13.Tsianakas V, Harris J, Ream E, Van Hemelrijck M, Purushotham A, Mucci L, et al. CanWalk: a feasibility study with embedded randomised controlled trial pilot of a walking intervention for people with recurrent or metastatic cancer. BMJ Open. 2017;7(2):e013719. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013719.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 14.Deloitte. Global mobile consumer trends: second edition. London: Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited; 2017. Available at https://www2.deloitte.com/global/en/pages/technology-media-and-telecommunications/articles/gx-global-mobile-consumer-trends.html. Accessed December 12, 2018Google Scholar
- 15.Turner-McGrievy GM, Hales SB, Schoffman DE, Valafar H, Brazendale K, Weaver RG, et al. Choosing between responsive-design websites versus mobile apps for your mobile behavioral intervention: presenting four case studies. Transl Behav Med. 2017;7(2):224–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13142-016-0448-y.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Short CE, Finlay A, Sanders I, Maher C. Development and pilot evaluation of a clinic-based mHealth app referral service to support adult cancer survivors increase their participation in physical activity using publicly available mobile apps. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2818-7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 20.IJsbrandy C, Ottevanger PB, Tsekou Diogeni M, Gerritsen WR, van Harten WH, Hermens RPMG. Review: effectiveness of implementation strategies to increase physical activity uptake during and after cancer treatment. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2018;122:157–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2017.09.005.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 22.Schoeppe S, Alley S, Rebar AL, Hayman M, Bray NA, Van Lippevelde W, et al. Apps to improve diet, physical activity and sedentary behaviour in children and adolescents: a review of quality, features and behaviour change techniques. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2017;14(1):83. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-017-0538-3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 23.Health Improvement Directorate. General practise physical activity questionnaire. London: National Health Service; 2009. Available at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/192453/GPPAQ_-_guidance.pdf. Accessed 12 Dec 2018Google Scholar
- 25.Michie S, Richardson M, Johnston M, Abraham C, Francis J, Hardeman W, et al. The behavior change technique taxonomy (v1) of 93 hierarchically clustered techniques: building an international consensus for the reporting of behavior change interventions. Ann Behav Med. 2013;46(1):81–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-013-9486-6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 26.Michie S, Wood CE, Johnston M, Abraham C, Francis JJ, Hardeman W. Behaviour change techniques: the development and evaluation of a taxonomic method for reporting and describing behaviour change interventions (a suite of five studies involving consensus methods, randomised controlled trials and analysis of qualitative data). Health Technol Assess. 2015;19(99):1–188. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta19990.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 29.Samdal GB, Eide GE, Barth T, Williams G, Meland E. Effective behaviour change techniques for physical activity and healthy eating in overweight and obese adults; systematic review and meta-regression analyses. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2017;14(1):42. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-017-0494-y.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 30.Roberts AL, Fisher A, Smith L, Heinrich M, Potts HWW. Digital health behaviour change interventions targeting physical activity and diet in cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cancer Surviv. 2017;11(6):704–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-017-0632-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 31.Siegel E. Fake reviews in Google Play and Apple App Store. Washington: Apptentive; 2014. https://www.apptentive.com/blog/2014/05/27/fake-reviews-google-play-apple-app-store/. Accessed 12 Dec 2018Google Scholar