Health Risks of Health Apps Highlighted by Expert: Why Guidance Is Essential

Health apps—from step counters to patient portals—have become ubiquitous tools for managing personal well-being. Yet experts are increasingly warning that without proper oversight and user guidance, these digital tools may pose risks to consumers. A recent analysis by Dutch researchers, published in De Telegraaf, highlights growing concerns about the safety and reliability of consumer-facing health applications, urging regulators and healthcare providers to implement stronger safeguards.

Safety Risks in Consumer Health Apps

The article in De Telegraaf cites a 2019 scoping review published in the Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (JAMIA), which examined safety concerns associated with mobile health (mHealth) applications. The review, led by researchers at Macquarie University in Australia, found that many consumer-facing health apps carry clinical risks, including inaccurate data interpretation, delayed medical care, and potential harm from misdiagnosis or improper treatment recommendations.

The study analyzed existing research on health app safety and identified several key areas of concern. Among them: apps that provide medical advice without sufficient evidence, tools that misinterpret user-inputted symptoms, and platforms that fail to protect sensitive health data. The authors concluded that these risks are not isolated incidents but part of a broader pattern of inadequate testing and regulation in the mHealth sector.

“Safety of apps is an emerging public health issue. The available evidence shows that apps pose clinical risks to consumers.”

Saba Akbar, Enrico Coiera, and Farah Magrabi, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (2019)

Regulatory Gaps and User Vulnerability

One of the central issues raised in De Telegraaf is the lack of consistent regulation for health apps, particularly those that fall outside the scope of medical devices. While apps that diagnose or treat conditions—such as those used for diabetes management or mental health support—may require approval from agencies like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or the European Medicines Agency (EMA), many wellness and lifestyle apps operate without formal oversight. This regulatory gray area leaves consumers vulnerable to apps that make unsubstantiated claims or provide misleading information.

The JAMIA review found that even apps designed to support chronic disease management can introduce risks if they fail to account for individual variability in symptoms, medications, or comorbidities. For example, an app that recommends insulin doses based on user-reported blood sugar levels could lead to dangerous errors if it does not factor in other medications or underlying health conditions. Similarly, mental health apps that offer cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) exercises without professional supervision may provide inadequate or inappropriate support for users with severe depression or anxiety.

Data Privacy and Security Concerns

Beyond clinical risks, De Telegraaf highlights concerns about data privacy and security in health apps. Many consumer-facing apps collect sensitive health information, including symptoms, medication histories, and biometric data. However, the JAMIA review noted that app developers often lack robust data protection measures, leaving user information vulnerable to breaches or unauthorized sharing with third parties. In some cases, apps have been found to sell user data to advertisers or insurers without explicit consent, raising ethical and legal questions about informed consent and transparency.

The review’s authors emphasized that while some apps include privacy policies, these documents are often lengthy, technical, and difficult for users to understand. Many consumers may unknowingly share sensitive health data without fully grasping how it will be used or who will have access to it. This issue is particularly acute for apps targeting vulnerable populations, such as those with mental health conditions or chronic illnesses, who may be more likely to disclose personal information in exchange for perceived support.

Calls for Stronger Oversight and Consumer Involvement

In response to these risks, the JAMIA review called for greater involvement from regulators, healthcare professionals, and consumers in the development and testing of health apps. The authors argued that mandatory reporting of safety concerns—similar to systems used for medical devices—could help identify and address risks before they harm users. They also recommended that app developers adopt standardized testing protocols to evaluate accuracy, usability, and data security before releasing products to the public.

De Telegraaf echoes these recommendations, quoting experts who advocate for clearer guidelines on app certification and user education. One proposed solution is the creation of a centralized database where consumers can verify whether an app has been independently reviewed for safety and efficacy. Such a system could help users make informed decisions about which apps to trust, particularly for managing serious health conditions.

Healthcare providers also have a role to play, according to the article. Clinicians are increasingly being asked to recommend or prescribe health apps to patients, but many lack the tools to assess their quality. Training programs for doctors, nurses, and other providers could help them evaluate apps more effectively and guide patients toward safer, evidence-based options. Integrating app data into electronic health records (EHRs) could improve care coordination, but only if the apps meet rigorous standards for accuracy and interoperability.

Balancing Innovation and Safety

The rapid growth of health apps reflects broader trends in digital health, where technology is increasingly used to empower patients and improve access to care. However, as De Telegraaf notes, innovation must not come at the expense of safety. The article highlights the need for a balanced approach—one that encourages the development of useful tools while protecting consumers from harm.

The JAMIA review’s authors acknowledged that not all health apps pose significant risks. Many, such as step counters or meditation guides, are low-stakes tools that can support general wellness. However, they cautioned that even seemingly benign apps can have unintended consequences. For example, a fitness app that encourages excessive exercise could exacerbate eating disorders or lead to injury in users with underlying health conditions.

To mitigate these risks, the review recommended that app developers adopt a “safety-by-design” approach, incorporating risk assessments and user feedback into every stage of development. This could include pilot testing with diverse user groups, transparency about data usage, and clear disclaimers about the app’s limitations. For apps targeting high-risk populations—such as those with heart disease or mental health disorders—developers should collaborate with medical professionals to ensure their tools align with clinical best practices.

What Consumers Can Do

While systemic changes are needed, De Telegraaf offers practical advice for consumers navigating the crowded health app market. Experts recommend the following steps to minimize risks:

• Check for independent reviews or certifications from reputable organizations, such as the FDA, EMA, or professional medical associations.
• Read privacy policies carefully and avoid apps that share data with third parties without explicit consent.
• Be wary of apps that make bold claims about diagnosing or treating medical conditions without scientific backing.
• Consult a healthcare provider before using an app to manage a chronic condition or serious illness.
• Report any safety concerns or adverse experiences with health apps to regulatory agencies or consumer protection organizations.

The article also advises users to look for apps that have been tested in clinical settings or endorsed by healthcare institutions. While such endorsements do not guarantee safety, they can provide an additional layer of reassurance. For example, apps developed in collaboration with hospitals or universities may undergo more rigorous testing than those created by independent developers.

Looking Ahead

The safety of health apps is likely to remain a pressing issue as digital health tools become more integrated into everyday life. The JAMIA review’s authors called for long-term studies to assess the real-world impact of health apps on patient outcomes, noting that much of the existing research focuses on short-term efficacy rather than sustained safety. They also emphasized the need for international collaboration to establish consistent standards for app development, regulation, and data protection.

For now, the message from experts is clear: while health apps have the potential to improve well-being, they are not a substitute for professional medical advice. Users should approach these tools with caution, and regulators must act swiftly to close gaps in oversight. As one expert quoted in De Telegraaf put it, Begeleiding is nodig—guidance is essential—to ensure that health apps deliver on their promise without putting consumers at risk.

As the digital health landscape continues to evolve, the challenge will be to strike a balance between innovation and safety, ensuring that technology serves as a tool for better health—not a source of harm.