Availability of virtual-assisted lung mapping affects procedure selection for early-stage lung cancer: a web-based cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: The availability of new techniques may affect surgeons' procedure selection and thereby affect clinical outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of the availability of virtual-assisted lung mapping (VAL-MAP) on the selection of lung resection methods. METHODS: Members of the Japanese Association for Chest Surgeons were invited to participate in a web-based survey. Participants were divided into those who had never used VAL-MAP (group 0), those who had used only VAL-MAP 1.0 (multiple dye marks on the pleural surface; group 1) and those who had used VAL-MAP 2.0 (multiple dye marks and intrabronchial microcoils for three-dimensional mapping; group 2). Participants were shown chest computed tomography images of 6 ground-glass opacity nodules and asked to choose surgical procedures to resect the nodules with sufficient resection margins greater than the lesion diameter or 2 cm. RESULTS: There were 197 surgeons in group 0, 49 in group 1 and 26 in group 2. All groups showed a similar trend of avoiding wedge resection for deeply located nodules. However, group 1 showed a trend of disagreeing with the selection of wedge resection compared with group 0 as measured by a Likert scale (1-5) by -0.21 points (95% confidence interval, -0.41 to -0.008 points, P = 0.042). This tendency disappeared in group 2. CONCLUSIONS: The availability of VAL-MAP 1.0 led to the selection of segmentectomy, while the availability of VAL-MAP 2.0 led to aggressive deep wedge resection.

Development and validation of the Japanese version of the uMARS (user version of the mobile app rating system).

BACKGROUND: Although the global market of Mobile Health Apps (mHealth apps) continues to grow dramatically, most mHealth apps still not only lack evidence base but have even not been evaluated for the basic usability or functionality. The User Version of the Mobile App Rating Scale (uMARS) was developed to allow end users to assess mHealth apps objectively and subjectively. However, there is no Japanese version of uMARS to date. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is (1) to develop a validated Japanese version of uMARS and (2) to assess the translated version's reliability and validity in evaluating mHealth apps. METHODS: The original uMARS was adapted for Japanese use by four specialists using universalist cross-cultural methods. Translation/back-translation was reviewed by the author of the original version of uMARS, and confirmed. Its reliability and validity were further evaluated as part of a prospective cohort study of postoperative patients using a new mHealth app. RESULTS: Conceptual equivalence was analyzed and all items in all subcategories of the original uMARS were included in the Japanese version. Internal consistency was deemed acceptable for all subscales of objective and subjective quality with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.75-0.85. Test-retest reliability of all subscales was also acceptable with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) of 0.57-0.88. Convergent/divergent validity and concurrent validity were also considered acceptable. CONCLUSION: A Japanese version of uMARS was cross-culturally validated and found to be as reliable as the original uMARS. This Japanese version of uMARS is expected to become a standard tool in assessing the quality of mHealth apps in Japan.

Japanese Version of the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS): Development and Validation.

BACKGROUND: The number of mobile health (mHealth) apps continues to rise each year. Widespread use of the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) has allowed objective and multidimensional evaluation of the quality of these apps. However, no Japanese version of MARS has been made available to date. OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this study were (1) to develop a Japanese version of MARS and (2) to assess the translated version's reliability and validity in evaluating mHealth apps. METHODS: To develop the Japanese version of MARS, cross-cultural adaptation was used using a universalist approach. A total of 50 mental health apps were evaluated by 2 independent raters. Internal consistency and interrater reliability were then calculated. Convergent and divergent validity were assessed using multitrait scaling analysis and concurrent validity. RESULTS: After cross-cultural adaptation, all 23 items from the original MARS were included in the Japanese version. Following translation, back-translation, and review by the author of the original MARS, a Japanese version of MARS was finalized. Internal consistency was acceptable by all subscales of objective and subjective quality (Cronbach α=.78-.89). Interrater reliability was deemed acceptable, with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) ranging from 0.61 to 0.79 for all subscales, except for "functionality," which had an ICC of 0.40. Convergent/divergent validity and concurrent validity were also considered acceptable. The rate of missing responses was high in several items in the "information" subscale. CONCLUSIONS: A Japanese version of MARS was developed and shown to be reliable and valid to a degree that was comparable to the original MARS. This Japanese version of MARS can be used as a standard to evaluate the quality and credibility of mHealth apps.