Skip to content

Stay Present with Your Phone: A Systematic Review and Standardized Rating of Mindfulness Apps in European App Stores.

Dana Schultchen, Yannik Terhorst, Tanja Holderied, Michael Stach, Eva-Maria Messner, Harald Baumeister, Lasse B Sander

International Journal of Behavioral Medicine November 20, 2020 DOI: 10.1007/s12529-020-09944-y (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Systematic review Randomized Peer reviewed
Population Mindfulness-focused apps available in European Apple App Store and Google Play Store
Measures Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS)
Topics Meditation
Keywords Systematic review Mars Mhealth Apps Mobile health
Key findings Among 192 mindfulness-focused apps evaluated with the Mobile Application Rating Scale, overall quality was moderate (mean 3.66, SD 0.48). Only seven apps had been tested in a randomized controlled trial, and most lacked data security and privacy policies. The authors argue that the abundance of often low-quality apps makes it difficult for users to identify a suitable app and that privacy and effectiveness shortcomings pose potential risks.

Abstract

Background: Mindfulness-based interventions show positive effects on physical and mental health. For a better integration of mindfulness techniques in daily life, the use of apps may be promising. However, only a few studies have examined the quality of mindfulness apps using a validated standardized instrument. This review aims to evaluate the content, quality, and privacy features of mindfulness-focused apps from European commercial app stores.

Methods: An automated search engine (webcrawler) was used to identify mindfulness-focused apps in the European Apple App- and Google Play store. Content, quality, and privacy features were evaluated by two independent reviewers using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS). The MARS assesses the subscales engagement, functionality, aesthetics, and information quality.

Results: Out of 605 identified apps, 192 met the inclusion criteria. The overall quality was moderate (M = 3.66, SD = 0.48). Seven apps were tested in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Most of the apps showed a lack of data security and no privacy policy. The five apps with the highest ratings are from a credible source, include a privacy policy, and are also based on standardized mindfulness and behavior change techniques.

Conclusions: The plethora of often low-quality apps in commercial app stores makes it difficult for users to identify a suitable app. Above that, the lack of scientific verification of effectiveness and shortcomings in privacy protection and security poses potential risks. So far, the potential of mindfulness-focused apps is not exploited in commercial app stores.

Comparable studies

Other systematic reviews and meta-analyses on meditation, most cited first.

Study Year Design Participants
Meditation Programs for Psychological Stress and Well-being Diverse adult clinical populations 2014 Meta-analysis n = 3,515
Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction for Stress Management in Healthy People: A Review and Meta-Analysis Healthy subjects 2009 Systematic review and meta-analysis
The psychological effects of meditation: A meta-analysis. Nonclinical groups of adult meditators 2012 Meta-analysis n = 163
Efficacy of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy in Prevention of Depressive Relapse Adults with recurrent depression in full or partial remission 2016 Meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized controlled trials n = 1,258
Mindfulness‐Based Stress Reduction and Mindfulness‐Based Cognitive Therapy – a systematic review of randomized controlled trials 2011 Systematic review

Citations in the library

Cited by 18

and 13 more in the library

Cites 22

and 17 more in the library

Explore topics