Edwin D. Boudreaux, PhD

 I have consulted and own shares of Polaris Health Directions, a small business that creates e-health interventions.

 To be familiar with important considerations when evaluating apps.  To learn about rating or evaluation agencies and websites.  To evaluate some specific apps.  Mood management  Tobacco  To be able to start using at least 1 app on Monday when you return to work

 What is the target behavior, disorder, or symptom?  Dumbphone vs. smartphone  Text only for dumbphone  Android vs. iPhone  What features does the app have?  Tracking  Intervention

 Usability  No universal metric but it is really important  Initial usability ▪ Can the individual learn to use it within 5 minutes?  Long-term sustainability ▪ Fatigue and desensitization is a problem  You can often test drive them on the computer

 Not theory based  Theory informed  Reference to a theory but not clear exactly how it’s linked  Theory driven  Clearly linked to a specific theory or theories

 Not rooted in any evidence  Evidence informed  App itself hasn’t been studied but it is rooted in traditions that have.  Empirically supported  App has been found to be superior to a control condition at modifying target.

 # of downloads  User ratings (  ’s)

 This aspect is in it’s infancy.  Health On Net – Internet  Consumer reports  there-really-is-an-app-for-that-health-interestor- will-be.html

  Certification-Standards-final.pdf Certification-Standards-final.pdf  Operability  Privacy  Security  Content  C1. App is based on one or more credible information sources such as an accepted protocol, published guidelines, evidence- based practice, peer-reviewed journal, etc.  C1.01 Source is documented  C1.02 If based on other than recognized source, documentation about how the content was formulated is provided.

 National Center for telehealth and technology   iMedicalApps  specialty20= specialty20=3378

 Telemental Health comparisons   Mobihealthnews   ABCT Technology and Behavior SIG 

 Commercially available  Search iTunes and Google Play  Depression  Anxiety  Compiled top downloaded apps  Described them based on their features  Chose 5 to complete an in depth eval on  1 Text  2 iPhone  2 Android

  Practical mood monitoring text program  Asks for mood rating 1 time a day (0 – 10)  Allows journaling  Must go on-line to see graph  Patient and provider on-line viewing capabilities



 e.cbttest&hl=en e.cbttest&hl=en  110 item test to map cognitive styles, CBT related articles

PROS  Intuitive interface  Theory driven (CBT)  Evidence informed  Combined with Cognitive Diary CBT app it’s more powerful CONS  Interface aesthetics are a bit crude  Limited features – “one time app”  Only available in English

  Suggestions and monitoring for positive activities, including “random”

PROS  Intuitive interface  Complex but easy-to-follow  Theory driven (BT)  Evidence informed (Lewinsohn, Linehan both referenced)  Activities can be done alone, in pairs, or groups (~400 activities)  Can generate activities based on proximity (GPS)  Interconnectity with Facebook and Twitter CONS  Only available in English  Could potentially exhaust realistic options  Time investment necessary to get full functionality

 tracker/id ?mt=8 tracker/id ?mt=8  Track and share mood ratings with provider

PROS  Intuitive interface  Theory driven (CBT)  Evidence informed  Many features to allow customization of ratings, prompts, access of support  Generates pdf or CSV reports to print or to provider CONS  Predominately centered on rating and journaling  Only available in English  Time investment necessary to get full functionality

 mood/id ?mt=8 mood/id ?mt=8  Track and share mood ratings with provider  Psychoeducation

PROS  Intuitive interface  Theory driven (CBT)  Evidence informed  Ratings can be shared with provider, others  Helps to ID and challenge automatic thoughts CONS  Only available in English  Time investment necessary to get full functionality