Loading…

Quality of Mobile Apps for Care Partners of People With Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias: Mobile App Rating Scale Evaluation

Over 11 million care partners in the United States who provide care to people living with Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD) cite persistent and pervasive unmet needs related to their caregiving role. The proliferation of mobile apps for care partners has the potential to meet care partn...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:JMIR mHealth and uHealth 2022-03, Vol.10 (3), p.e33863-e33863
Main Authors: Werner, Nicole E, Brown, Janetta C, Loganathar, Priya, Holden, Richard J
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c457t-6f151fd78644db2b8ea032f331e763721033c5e3ce160002fc265296d0c950b03
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c457t-6f151fd78644db2b8ea032f331e763721033c5e3ce160002fc265296d0c950b03
container_end_page e33863
container_issue 3
container_start_page e33863
container_title JMIR mHealth and uHealth
container_volume 10
creator Werner, Nicole E
Brown, Janetta C
Loganathar, Priya
Holden, Richard J
description Over 11 million care partners in the United States who provide care to people living with Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD) cite persistent and pervasive unmet needs related to their caregiving role. The proliferation of mobile apps for care partners has the potential to meet care partners' needs, but the quality of apps is unknown. This study aims to evaluate the quality of publicly available apps for care partners of people living with ADRD and identify design features of low- and high-quality apps to guide future research and user-centered app development. We searched the US Apple App and Google Play stores with the criteria that included apps needed to be available in the US Google Play or Apple App stores, accessible to users out of the box, and primarily intended for use by an informal (family or friend) care partner of a person living with ADRD. We classified and tabulated app functionalities. The included apps were then evaluated using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) using 23 items across 5 dimensions: engagement, functionality, aesthetics, information, and subjective quality. We computed descriptive statistics for each rating. To identify recommendations for future research and app development, we categorized rater comments on score-driving factors for each MARS rating item and what the app could have done to improve the item score. We evaluated 17 apps. We found that, on average, apps are of minimally acceptable quality. Functionalities supported by apps included education (12/17, 71%), interactive training (3/17, 18%), documentation (3/17, 18%), tracking symptoms (2/17, 12%), care partner community (3/17, 18%), interaction with clinical experts (1/17, 6%), care coordination (2/17, 12%), and activities for the person living with ADRD (2/17, 12%). Of the 17 apps, 8 (47%) had only 1 feature, 6 (35%) had 2 features, and 3 (18%) had 3 features. The MARS quality mean score across apps was 3.08 (SD 0.83) on the 5-point rating scale (1=inadequate to 5=excellent), with apps scoring highest on average on functionality (mean 3.37, SD 0.99) and aesthetics (mean 3.24, SD 0.92) and lowest on average on information (mean 2.95, SD 0.95) and engagement (mean 2.76, SD 0.89). The MARS subjective quality mean score across apps was 2.26 (SD 1.02). We identified apps whose mean scores were more than 1 point below minimally acceptable quality, whereas some were more than 1 point above. Many apps had broken features and were rated as below acceptable fo
doi_str_mv 10.2196/33863
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_bc30287198c84ee4869f35821f5e7fb3</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_bc30287198c84ee4869f35821f5e7fb3</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>2645676396</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c457t-6f151fd78644db2b8ea032f331e763721033c5e3ce160002fc265296d0c950b03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkl1rFDEUhgdRbKn7FyQggjdr8zHJTLwQlm1tCxVrVbwMmczJbpbMZJrMFOqtf7zZbi1brxJOHh7OG96imBH8kRIpjhmrBXtRHFIqyZxTSl_u3Q-KWUobjDEhlFPJXxcHjLOyLkV1WPz9PmnvxjsULPoaGucBLYYhIRsiWuoI6ErHsYeYtsAVhCEDv924Rgv_Zw2ug4hOXAKdAOm-Rdfg9QgtOoEO-tHp9GnPiq716PoV-mF0Hpzeaj_lQejfFK-s9glmj-dR8evL6c_l-fzy29nFcnE5NyWvxrmwhBPbVrUoy7ahTQ0aM2oZI1AJVlGCGTMcmAEiclpqDRU5r2ixkRw3mB0VFztvG_RGDdF1Ot6poJ16GIS4UjmsMx5UYximdUVkbeoSoKyFtIzXlFgOlW1Ydn3euYap6aA1OW3U_pn0-Uvv1moVbpXEWBBWZsGHR0EMNxOkUXUuGfBe9xCmpGhOKcuKVzKj7_5DN2GKff6qLcVFTi9Fpt7vKBNDShHs0zIEq21L1ENLMvd2f_Mn6l8n2D0V8bTD</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2645676396</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Quality of Mobile Apps for Care Partners of People With Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias: Mobile App Rating Scale Evaluation</title><source>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Werner, Nicole E ; Brown, Janetta C ; Loganathar, Priya ; Holden, Richard J</creator><creatorcontrib>Werner, Nicole E ; Brown, Janetta C ; Loganathar, Priya ; Holden, Richard J</creatorcontrib><description>Over 11 million care partners in the United States who provide care to people living with Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD) cite persistent and pervasive unmet needs related to their caregiving role. The proliferation of mobile apps for care partners has the potential to meet care partners' needs, but the quality of apps is unknown. This study aims to evaluate the quality of publicly available apps for care partners of people living with ADRD and identify design features of low- and high-quality apps to guide future research and user-centered app development. We searched the US Apple App and Google Play stores with the criteria that included apps needed to be available in the US Google Play or Apple App stores, accessible to users out of the box, and primarily intended for use by an informal (family or friend) care partner of a person living with ADRD. We classified and tabulated app functionalities. The included apps were then evaluated using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) using 23 items across 5 dimensions: engagement, functionality, aesthetics, information, and subjective quality. We computed descriptive statistics for each rating. To identify recommendations for future research and app development, we categorized rater comments on score-driving factors for each MARS rating item and what the app could have done to improve the item score. We evaluated 17 apps. We found that, on average, apps are of minimally acceptable quality. Functionalities supported by apps included education (12/17, 71%), interactive training (3/17, 18%), documentation (3/17, 18%), tracking symptoms (2/17, 12%), care partner community (3/17, 18%), interaction with clinical experts (1/17, 6%), care coordination (2/17, 12%), and activities for the person living with ADRD (2/17, 12%). Of the 17 apps, 8 (47%) had only 1 feature, 6 (35%) had 2 features, and 3 (18%) had 3 features. The MARS quality mean score across apps was 3.08 (SD 0.83) on the 5-point rating scale (1=inadequate to 5=excellent), with apps scoring highest on average on functionality (mean 3.37, SD 0.99) and aesthetics (mean 3.24, SD 0.92) and lowest on average on information (mean 2.95, SD 0.95) and engagement (mean 2.76, SD 0.89). The MARS subjective quality mean score across apps was 2.26 (SD 1.02). We identified apps whose mean scores were more than 1 point below minimally acceptable quality, whereas some were more than 1 point above. Many apps had broken features and were rated as below acceptable for engagement and information. Minimally acceptable quality is likely to be insufficient to meet care partner needs. Future research should establish minimum quality standards across dimensions for care partner mobile apps. Design features of high-quality apps identified in this study can provide the foundation for benchmarking these standards.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2291-5222</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2291-5222</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2196/33863</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35348467</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Canada: JMIR Publications</publisher><subject>Activities of daily living ; Alzheimer Disease - therapy ; Alzheimer's disease ; Caregivers ; Clinical trials ; Data collection ; Delivery of Health Care ; Dementia ; Design ; Humans ; Mobile Applications ; Original Paper ; Ratings &amp; rankings ; Telemedicine ; United States ; User needs</subject><ispartof>JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2022-03, Vol.10 (3), p.e33863-e33863</ispartof><rights>Nicole E Werner, Janetta C Brown, Priya Loganathar, Richard J Holden. Originally published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth (https://mhealth.jmir.org), 29.03.2022.</rights><rights>2022. This work is licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>Nicole E Werner, Janetta C Brown, Priya Loganathar, Richard J Holden. Originally published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth (https://mhealth.jmir.org), 29.03.2022. 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c457t-6f151fd78644db2b8ea032f331e763721033c5e3ce160002fc265296d0c950b03</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c457t-6f151fd78644db2b8ea032f331e763721033c5e3ce160002fc265296d0c950b03</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5244-6133 ; 0000-0002-3603-6158 ; 0000-0003-2363-9491 ; 0000-0002-9483-2849</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2645676396/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2645676396?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,25731,27901,27902,36989,36990,44566,53766,53768,74869</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35348467$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Werner, Nicole E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, Janetta C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Loganathar, Priya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holden, Richard J</creatorcontrib><title>Quality of Mobile Apps for Care Partners of People With Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias: Mobile App Rating Scale Evaluation</title><title>JMIR mHealth and uHealth</title><addtitle>JMIR Mhealth Uhealth</addtitle><description>Over 11 million care partners in the United States who provide care to people living with Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD) cite persistent and pervasive unmet needs related to their caregiving role. The proliferation of mobile apps for care partners has the potential to meet care partners' needs, but the quality of apps is unknown. This study aims to evaluate the quality of publicly available apps for care partners of people living with ADRD and identify design features of low- and high-quality apps to guide future research and user-centered app development. We searched the US Apple App and Google Play stores with the criteria that included apps needed to be available in the US Google Play or Apple App stores, accessible to users out of the box, and primarily intended for use by an informal (family or friend) care partner of a person living with ADRD. We classified and tabulated app functionalities. The included apps were then evaluated using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) using 23 items across 5 dimensions: engagement, functionality, aesthetics, information, and subjective quality. We computed descriptive statistics for each rating. To identify recommendations for future research and app development, we categorized rater comments on score-driving factors for each MARS rating item and what the app could have done to improve the item score. We evaluated 17 apps. We found that, on average, apps are of minimally acceptable quality. Functionalities supported by apps included education (12/17, 71%), interactive training (3/17, 18%), documentation (3/17, 18%), tracking symptoms (2/17, 12%), care partner community (3/17, 18%), interaction with clinical experts (1/17, 6%), care coordination (2/17, 12%), and activities for the person living with ADRD (2/17, 12%). Of the 17 apps, 8 (47%) had only 1 feature, 6 (35%) had 2 features, and 3 (18%) had 3 features. The MARS quality mean score across apps was 3.08 (SD 0.83) on the 5-point rating scale (1=inadequate to 5=excellent), with apps scoring highest on average on functionality (mean 3.37, SD 0.99) and aesthetics (mean 3.24, SD 0.92) and lowest on average on information (mean 2.95, SD 0.95) and engagement (mean 2.76, SD 0.89). The MARS subjective quality mean score across apps was 2.26 (SD 1.02). We identified apps whose mean scores were more than 1 point below minimally acceptable quality, whereas some were more than 1 point above. Many apps had broken features and were rated as below acceptable for engagement and information. Minimally acceptable quality is likely to be insufficient to meet care partner needs. Future research should establish minimum quality standards across dimensions for care partner mobile apps. Design features of high-quality apps identified in this study can provide the foundation for benchmarking these standards.</description><subject>Activities of daily living</subject><subject>Alzheimer Disease - therapy</subject><subject>Alzheimer's disease</subject><subject>Caregivers</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Data collection</subject><subject>Delivery of Health Care</subject><subject>Dementia</subject><subject>Design</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Mobile Applications</subject><subject>Original Paper</subject><subject>Ratings &amp; rankings</subject><subject>Telemedicine</subject><subject>United States</subject><subject>User needs</subject><issn>2291-5222</issn><issn>2291-5222</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkl1rFDEUhgdRbKn7FyQggjdr8zHJTLwQlm1tCxVrVbwMmczJbpbMZJrMFOqtf7zZbi1brxJOHh7OG96imBH8kRIpjhmrBXtRHFIqyZxTSl_u3Q-KWUobjDEhlFPJXxcHjLOyLkV1WPz9PmnvxjsULPoaGucBLYYhIRsiWuoI6ErHsYeYtsAVhCEDv924Rgv_Zw2ug4hOXAKdAOm-Rdfg9QgtOoEO-tHp9GnPiq716PoV-mF0Hpzeaj_lQejfFK-s9glmj-dR8evL6c_l-fzy29nFcnE5NyWvxrmwhBPbVrUoy7ahTQ0aM2oZI1AJVlGCGTMcmAEiclpqDRU5r2ixkRw3mB0VFztvG_RGDdF1Ot6poJ16GIS4UjmsMx5UYximdUVkbeoSoKyFtIzXlFgOlW1Ydn3euYap6aA1OW3U_pn0-Uvv1moVbpXEWBBWZsGHR0EMNxOkUXUuGfBe9xCmpGhOKcuKVzKj7_5DN2GKff6qLcVFTi9Fpt7vKBNDShHs0zIEq21L1ENLMvd2f_Mn6l8n2D0V8bTD</recordid><startdate>20220329</startdate><enddate>20220329</enddate><creator>Werner, Nicole E</creator><creator>Brown, Janetta C</creator><creator>Loganathar, Priya</creator><creator>Holden, Richard J</creator><general>JMIR Publications</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5244-6133</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3603-6158</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2363-9491</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9483-2849</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220329</creationdate><title>Quality of Mobile Apps for Care Partners of People With Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias: Mobile App Rating Scale Evaluation</title><author>Werner, Nicole E ; Brown, Janetta C ; Loganathar, Priya ; Holden, Richard J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c457t-6f151fd78644db2b8ea032f331e763721033c5e3ce160002fc265296d0c950b03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Activities of daily living</topic><topic>Alzheimer Disease - therapy</topic><topic>Alzheimer's disease</topic><topic>Caregivers</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Data collection</topic><topic>Delivery of Health Care</topic><topic>Dementia</topic><topic>Design</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Mobile Applications</topic><topic>Original Paper</topic><topic>Ratings &amp; rankings</topic><topic>Telemedicine</topic><topic>United States</topic><topic>User needs</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Werner, Nicole E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, Janetta C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Loganathar, Priya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holden, Richard J</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>JMIR mHealth and uHealth</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Werner, Nicole E</au><au>Brown, Janetta C</au><au>Loganathar, Priya</au><au>Holden, Richard J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Quality of Mobile Apps for Care Partners of People With Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias: Mobile App Rating Scale Evaluation</atitle><jtitle>JMIR mHealth and uHealth</jtitle><addtitle>JMIR Mhealth Uhealth</addtitle><date>2022-03-29</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>e33863</spage><epage>e33863</epage><pages>e33863-e33863</pages><issn>2291-5222</issn><eissn>2291-5222</eissn><abstract>Over 11 million care partners in the United States who provide care to people living with Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD) cite persistent and pervasive unmet needs related to their caregiving role. The proliferation of mobile apps for care partners has the potential to meet care partners' needs, but the quality of apps is unknown. This study aims to evaluate the quality of publicly available apps for care partners of people living with ADRD and identify design features of low- and high-quality apps to guide future research and user-centered app development. We searched the US Apple App and Google Play stores with the criteria that included apps needed to be available in the US Google Play or Apple App stores, accessible to users out of the box, and primarily intended for use by an informal (family or friend) care partner of a person living with ADRD. We classified and tabulated app functionalities. The included apps were then evaluated using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) using 23 items across 5 dimensions: engagement, functionality, aesthetics, information, and subjective quality. We computed descriptive statistics for each rating. To identify recommendations for future research and app development, we categorized rater comments on score-driving factors for each MARS rating item and what the app could have done to improve the item score. We evaluated 17 apps. We found that, on average, apps are of minimally acceptable quality. Functionalities supported by apps included education (12/17, 71%), interactive training (3/17, 18%), documentation (3/17, 18%), tracking symptoms (2/17, 12%), care partner community (3/17, 18%), interaction with clinical experts (1/17, 6%), care coordination (2/17, 12%), and activities for the person living with ADRD (2/17, 12%). Of the 17 apps, 8 (47%) had only 1 feature, 6 (35%) had 2 features, and 3 (18%) had 3 features. The MARS quality mean score across apps was 3.08 (SD 0.83) on the 5-point rating scale (1=inadequate to 5=excellent), with apps scoring highest on average on functionality (mean 3.37, SD 0.99) and aesthetics (mean 3.24, SD 0.92) and lowest on average on information (mean 2.95, SD 0.95) and engagement (mean 2.76, SD 0.89). The MARS subjective quality mean score across apps was 2.26 (SD 1.02). We identified apps whose mean scores were more than 1 point below minimally acceptable quality, whereas some were more than 1 point above. Many apps had broken features and were rated as below acceptable for engagement and information. Minimally acceptable quality is likely to be insufficient to meet care partner needs. Future research should establish minimum quality standards across dimensions for care partner mobile apps. Design features of high-quality apps identified in this study can provide the foundation for benchmarking these standards.</abstract><cop>Canada</cop><pub>JMIR Publications</pub><pmid>35348467</pmid><doi>10.2196/33863</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5244-6133</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3603-6158</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2363-9491</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9483-2849</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2291-5222
ispartof JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2022-03, Vol.10 (3), p.e33863-e33863
issn 2291-5222
2291-5222
language eng
recordid cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_bc30287198c84ee4869f35821f5e7fb3
source Publicly Available Content (ProQuest); PubMed Central
subjects Activities of daily living
Alzheimer Disease - therapy
Alzheimer's disease
Caregivers
Clinical trials
Data collection
Delivery of Health Care
Dementia
Design
Humans
Mobile Applications
Original Paper
Ratings & rankings
Telemedicine
United States
User needs
title Quality of Mobile Apps for Care Partners of People With Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias: Mobile App Rating Scale Evaluation
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T14%3A50%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Quality%20of%20Mobile%20Apps%20for%20Care%20Partners%20of%20People%20With%20Alzheimer%20Disease%20and%20Related%20Dementias:%20Mobile%20App%20Rating%20Scale%20Evaluation&rft.jtitle=JMIR%20mHealth%20and%20uHealth&rft.au=Werner,%20Nicole%20E&rft.date=2022-03-29&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=e33863&rft.epage=e33863&rft.pages=e33863-e33863&rft.issn=2291-5222&rft.eissn=2291-5222&rft_id=info:doi/10.2196/33863&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E2645676396%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c457t-6f151fd78644db2b8ea032f331e763721033c5e3ce160002fc265296d0c950b03%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2645676396&rft_id=info:pmid/35348467&rfr_iscdi=true