This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional". The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics". These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously. doi: 10.1111/ cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. Review article: the aetiology, diagnosis, mechanisms and clinical evidence for food intolerance. Tuck CJ, Biesiekierski JR, Schmid-Grendelmeier P, Pohl D. Review article: the diagnosis and management of food allergy and food intolerances. Tang R, Wang Z, Ji C, Leung PSC, Woo E, Chang C, Wang M, Liu B, Wei J, Sun J. Adverse reactions to food: allergies and intolerances. Montalto M, Santoro L, D'Onofrio Ferruccio, Curigliano V, Gallo A, Visca D, Cammarota G, Gasbarrini A, Gasbarrini G. Originally published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth (). ©Floriana Mandracchia, Elisabet Llauradó, Lucia Tarro, Rosa Maria Valls, Rosa Solà. food allergy food hypersensitivity food intolerance mHealth mobile applications mobile health. The critical points identified in this systematic search can help improve the innovativeness and applicability of future food allergy and intolerance apps.Īllergens eHealth. In this systematic search of food allergy or intolerance apps, acceptable MARS quality was identified, although the engagement section for food product and restaurant purpose apps should be improved and the included apps should be tested in trials. However, when the apps were compared by purpose, critical points were identified: meal planner apps showed significantly higher engagement (mean 4.1, SD 0.4) than food product (mean 3.0, SD 0.6 P=.05) and restaurant (mean 3.2, SD 0.3 P=.02) apps. From the between-section comparison, engagement (mean 3.5, SD 0.6) obtained significantly lower scores than functionality (mean 4.1, SD 0.6), esthetics (mean 4, SD 0.5), and information (mean 3.8, SD 0.4). Therefore, a rating ≥3 points indicated overall acceptable quality. The mean (SD) MARS scores (maximum 5 points) were 3.8 (SD 0.4) for objective quality, highlighting whether any app had been tested in trials 3.5 (SD 0.6) for subjective quality and 3.6 (SD 0.7) for the app-specific section. Of the 1376 apps identified, 14 were included: 12 related to food allergies and intolerances that detect 2-16 food allergens and 2 related only to gluten intolerance. Differences between MARS sections and between app purposes and correlations among MARS sections, star ratings, and numbers of reviews were evaluated. Furthermore, the output and input features were evaluated. Then, the apps were divided according to their purpose (searching for allergen-free "food products," "restaurants," or recipes in "meal planners") and evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 points using the MARS in terms of (1) app classification category with a descriptive aim (2) app subjective and objective quality categories comprised of engagement, functionality, esthetics, and information sections (Medline was searched for eligible apps to check whether they had been tested in trials) and (3) an optional app-specific section.
Foodie app update#
The inclusion criteria were a user star rating of ≥3 (of 5 stars) to limit the selection to the most highly rated apps ≥1000 reviews as an indicator of reliability and the most recent update performed up to 2017.
This systematic search identified apps through the keywords "food allergy," "food intolerance," and "allergens" in English, Spanish, and Italian in the Apple App Store (iOS) and Google Play Store (Android).
This study aimed to systemically search and assess food allergy or intolerance apps in app stores using the multidimensional Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) to rate the objective and subjective quality and to identify critical points for future improvements. Food allergies and intolerances are increasing worldwide, and mobile phone apps could be a promising tool for self-management of these issues.