Skip to main content

Advertisement

Correction to: How can clinicians, specialty societies and others evaluate and improve the quality of apps for patient use?

The original article was published in BMC Medicine 2018 16:225

Correction to: BMC Med

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-018-1211-7

Since the publication of this article [1] it has come to my attention that it contains an error in which the y-axis in Fig. 2 was inverted, thus incorrectly displaying a weak negative correlation rather than a weak positive one. This error was introduced as the order of the data on which Fig. 2 was based [2] was misread. The corrected version of Fig. 2 can be seen below, in which a weak positive correlation is now displayed. This does not change the general point, that app users and app stores appear to take little notice of the source of information on which apps are based. I apologise to readers for this error.

Fig. 2
figure1

Comparison of Apple iTunes App Store or Google Play store rank (vertical axis, inverse scale) with the quality of the underlying evidence on which 47 smoking cessation apps are based. The higher the evidence score (x axis), the more the app conforms to relevant guidelines from the US Preventive Service Task Force. The lower the store rank (y axis, reverse scale), the higher the app is listed in the App Store or Google Play store. The brown ellipse shows a cluster of low quality, high ranked apps, while the blue ellipse shows a cluster of high quality, low ranked apps. Author’s analysis based on data from Abroms et al. [13]

References

  1. 1.

    Wyatt JC. How can clinicians, specialty societies and others evaluate and improve the quality of apps for patient use? BMC Med. 2018; https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12916-018-1211-7.

  2. 2.

    Abroms LC, Lee Westmaas J, Bontemps-Jones J, Ramani R, Mellerson J. A content analysis of popular smartphone apps for smoking cessation. Am J Prev Med. 2013;45(6):732–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2013.07.008.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Jeremy C. Wyatt.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark