# What’s in an App? Scoping Review and Quality Assessment of Clinically Available Hearing-Aid-Connected Apps

## TL;DR

This study reviews and evaluates the quality of hearing-aid-connected apps available in the Apple App Store to help clinicians and users understand their features and usability.

## Contribution

The study provides a comprehensive quality assessment of clinically available hearing-aid-connected apps using the Mobile Application Rating Scale.

## Key findings

- Apps varied in metadata detail and specialized features like tinnitus management and remote clinician support.
- High-performing apps scored better in engagement, functionality, and aesthetics but scored low in information quality.
- The study emphasizes the need for improved metadata transparency and patient-centered design in these apps.

## Abstract

Background/Objectives: Mobile health (mHealth) tools, such as smartphone apps, support person-centred care for persons with hearing loss engaging in the hearing aid management process. Hearing-aid-connected apps are increasingly common in audiological care, making it important to evaluate their availability and quality for clinicians, developers, and end-users. This scoping review aimed to identify, summarize, and synthesize information on clinically available hearing-aid-connected apps and evaluate their quality. Methods: A search of the Apple App Store (Canada) was conducted in August 2024 to identify current hearing-aid-connected apps that support hearing aid management. Metadata and features were extracted, and app quality was assessed using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS). Quality was assessed across four objective domains (engagement, functionality, aesthetics, and information) and one subjective domain. Results: Apps had varying levels of metadata detail, including updates, compatibility, and target populations. All apps included common hearing aid controls (e.g., volume adjustment, microphone directionality), while more specialized features (tinnitus management, health tracking, remote clinician support) varied. High-performing apps scored significantly higher in engagement, functionality, aesthetics, and subjective quality, and all apps scored low in information quality, particularly for evidence and credibility. Conclusions: Findings highlight the need for transparent and informative metadata reporting and patient-centred design to improve clinical awareness, usability, and uptake of hearing-aid-connected apps.