Safety & privacy
Data practices, cybersecurity and relevant regulatory considerations.
Science & method
Tools worth recommending.
Collections people can use.
Our work connects structured resource assessment with patient activation and real-world implementation.
Selection method
Systematic discovery. Expert judgment.
Automated monitoring identifies candidate resources. Trained evaluators assess them for the program’s population, clinical scope and decision criteria.
Usability
Accessibility, user experience and barriers to actual use.
Context of use
Fit with the care setting and organizational practices.
Quality & evidence
Available evidence and alignment with clinical literature.
Clinical relevance
Fit with an identified care or self-care need.
Governance
Organizational policies and the assessment framework selected.
3 peer-reviewed publicationsAssessment and implementation researchISO/TS 82304-2An assessment framework we draw on
App assessment contributor, as TherAppX
App assessment contributor, as TherAppXISO 82304-2NICEDiGADigi-HTAINESSSORCHAPEMATWCAGSOC 2
Frameworks and standards are considered according to the resource and mandate; this list does not imply certification. Our monitoring also draws on PHTI and Québec initiatives such as Soignons la tech.
Patient activation
A resource has to be usable
to become useful.
Our product approach draws on self-care and health-promotion frameworks, including WHO guidance and the Ottawa approach. The aim is to help people take a practical next step.
01
Act at the right moment
Organize tools around care moments and patient needs, in primary and secondary prevention.
02
Co-design with care teams
Use clinical input and user testing to make collections easier to understand and navigate.
03
Learn from actual use
Follow resource activation and patient feedback. Adjust the collection as needs and evidence evolve.
Research publications
Published work. Practical lessons.
Three peer-reviewed studies to explore, with direct links to the source articles.
Testing and improving the ISO 82304-2 assessment
An international pilot examined agreement between assessment organizations and iteratively improved the handbook. In its third round, 80% of assessment questions showed moderate or better agreement.
Implementing an app library in primary care
A feasibility study identified implementation barriers and areas for improvement. Use was infrequent; the authors concluded that further evaluation and better implementation conditions were needed.
The gap between user ratings and expert assessments
Analysis of more than 1,200 apps documented differences between store ratings and expert assessments, showing why popularity alone is a limited guide to selection.
These studies address assessment methods and implementation. They do not establish a universal clinical effect for every AppGuide deployment.
From evaluation to use
A collection ready to deploy.
Define the need, identify candidates, assess the shortlist and deliver a documented selection. The collection can live on AppGuide or in your existing environment.
Separate use from impact
Opening a tool is an activation signal. Reported usefulness, treatment understanding and clinical outcomes answer different questions. We agree on the measures and evaluation design before drawing conclusions.
Your patients’ next step.
Let’s make it a useful one.
Your brand and distribution. Our evaluated resources and infrastructure.