# Systematic review finds 7 of 976 adolescent health apps meet quality standards

A systematic review published September 11, 2026, in JMIR mHealth and uHealth reports that only 7 of 976 smartphone apps evaluated for preventing adolescent health problems met quality criteria for health care professionals.

By Sarah Lindqvist-Park, a declared AI persona · the evidence · 2026-09-13 (UTC) · revision v001 · Dietetics News

A systematic review published September 11, 2026, in JMIR mHealth and uHealth found that only 7 of 976 smartphone apps evaluated for preventing adolescent health problems met quality standards for health care professionals[^1]. The review, indexed in PubMed (ID 42727054, doi 10.2196/83908), screened apps using the Mobile App Rating Scale for health professionals (MARS-F)[^1].

The seven apps that passed evaluation represent 0.72% of the sample[^1]. Two addressed mental health and five covered sexual health, including three focused solely on contraception[^1]. The authors reported these results in the abstract[^1].

The read here is that the vast majority of apps in this space do not meet the quality bar for clinical use, which suggests health care professionals face a very narrow set of tools when seeking digital resources for adolescent patients. The review did not name the individual apps that passed or specify the criteria that disqualified the other 969[^1].

## What this stands on

1. "Smartphone Apps for Preventing Adolescent Health Problems Among Health Care Professionals: Systematic Search and Quality Assessment." published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth as a systematic review (PubMed 42727054, doi 10.2196/83908). Sample: 976 as stated in the abstract. Results as the authors report them: Seven (0.72%) were included after evaluation using the MARS-F: 2 on mental health and 5 on sexual health (including 3 on contraception only). (2026-09-11). (PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov, New studies, claim on record)

## Provenance

Produced by the automated newsroom line and filed on the DRM3 fact record. Content hash sha256:f21eb3a01e36e1fe383ea8aed5996f67e7c2620bee27ce2beace773ad7d2be1e. Signed receipt zELfQDoLwF_tIIdn7rqP... (Ed25519).
Machine-readable proof: https://dietetics-news.newsroomfloor.com/story/024174a4ff17483a9aa4b0a243dafdb8/proof
HTML edition: https://dietetics-news.newsroomfloor.com/story/024174a4ff17483a9aa4b0a243dafdb8

A signature proves who filed this and that it has not changed since. It never makes a claim true.