Evaluating Asthma Mobile Apps to Improve Asthma Self-Management: User Ratings and Sentiment Analysis of Publicly Available Apps.

BACKGROUND: The development and use of mobile health (mHealth) apps for asthma management have risen dramatically over the past two decades. Asthma apps vary widely in their content and features; however, prior research has rarely examined preferences of users of publicly available apps. OBJECTIVE: The goals of this study were to provide a descriptive overview of asthma mobile apps that are publicly available and to assess the usability of asthma apps currently available on the market to identify content and features of apps associated with positive and negative user ratings. METHODS: Reviews were collected on June 23, 2020, and included publicly posted reviews until June 21, 2020. To characterize features associated with high or low app ratings, we first dichotomized the average user rating of the asthma app into 2 categories: a high average rating and a low average rating. Asthma apps with average ratings of 4 and above were categorized as having a high average rating. Asthma apps with average ratings of less than 4 were categorized as having a low average rating. For the sentiment analysis, we modeled both 2-word (bi-gram) and 3-word (tri-gram) phrases which commonly appeared across highly rated and lowly rated apps. RESULTS: Of the 10 apps that met the inclusion criteria, a total of 373 reviews were examined across all apps. Among apps reviewed, 53.4% (199/373) received high ratings (average ratings of 4 or 5) and 47.2% (176/373) received low ratings (average ratings of 3 or less). The number of ratings across all apps ranged from 188 (AsthmaMD) to 10 (My Asthma App); 30% (3/10) of apps were available on both Android and iOS. From the sentiment analysis, key features of asthma management that were common among highly rated apps included the tracking of peak flow readings (n=48), asthma symptom monitoring (n=11), and action plans (n=10). Key features related to functionality that were common among highly rated apps included ease of use (n=5). Users most commonly reported loss of data (n=14) and crashing of app (n=12) as functionality issues among poorly rated asthma apps. CONCLUSIONS: Our study results demonstrate that asthma app quality, maintenance, and updates vary widely across apps and platforms. These findings may call into question the long-term engagement with asthma apps, a crucial factor for determining their potential to improve asthma self-management and asthma clinical outcomes.