| Course | NR 361 RN Information Systems in Healthcare |
|---|---|
| Week | 6 |
| Paper type | Mobile health app review |
| Length | About 1,090 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | RN-to-BSN |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NR 361 Week 6
Reviewing a Cycle and Pregnancy Tracking App Against Five Criteria Before Recommending It to Patients
Student Name
College of Nursing, Chamberlain University
NR 361: RN Information Systems in Healthcare
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Reviewing a Cycle and Pregnancy Tracking App Against Five Criteria Before Recommending It to Patients
The User and the Category
The user in this review is a woman in her twenties or thirties who wants to track her menstrual cycle, predict fertile days while trying to conceive, and continue using the same app to log symptoms, weight and appointments once she is pregnant. Patients in the writer's women's health clinic ask nurses weekly which app to use, and nurses have no agreed answer. The app reviewed is a composite of the features and policies of the most popular free cycle-tracking apps: it is free to download, offers premium features by subscription, and asks the user to log period dates, symptoms, sexual activity, mood, basal body temperature and, if pregnant, due date and pregnancy symptoms.
The criteria were set before the app was examined, so that the verdict follows from them rather than from how pleasant the app is to use. There are five: what the user actually does each day, what the app records, where the recordings go, how accurate the predictions are, and whether the app supports or replaces clinical care.
What the User Actually Does
A user who opens the app once a month to record a period date produces very different data from one who logs symptoms, temperature and intercourse every morning. The app encourages daily logging through reminders and streaks, and users trying to conceive are the most likely to log daily. That matters for every later criterion: daily logging makes fertility predictions better, and it also makes the data far more sensitive, because a daily log of sexual activity, symptoms and a missed period describes a pregnancy, or its end, in detail.
What the App Records and Where It Goes
The app records everything the user enters plus device information, approximate location and usage patterns. The privacy policy, which runs more than 4,000 words, states that data may be shared with service providers for analytics and advertising, that de-identified data may be shared with research partners, and that data may be disclosed in response to legal requests. The user can delete her account, but the policy does not say whether data already shared is recalled.
Two facts make this criterion decisive. First, most consumer health apps are not covered by HIPAA, because the app developer is not a health care provider, health plan or clearinghouse, so the protections a patient expects for her medical record do not apply to what she types into the app, as federal guidance written for consumers explains (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2022). Second, sharing by apps in this category is documented. The Federal Trade Commission (2021) finalized an order against a fertility-tracking app that had shared users' health information with third-party analytics and marketing companies despite promising to keep it private, and a scoping review of the privacy policies of women's health apps found that many allowed data sharing with third parties and that policies were often unclear about security and user rights (Alfawzan et al., 2022). In a legal environment in which information about pregnancy and its outcomes can have legal consequences in some states, data from a cycle-tracking app is among the most sensitive health information a patient can generate.
Accuracy of Predictions
The app predicts periods and fertile days from past cycle lengths and, if entered, temperature. For women with regular cycles, predicted period dates are usually close. Fertile-window predictions based on calendar averages alone are less reliable, because ovulation varies from cycle to cycle, and the app's own terms state that it is not intended as contraception. Users who rely on the app to avoid pregnancy, without understanding that disclaimer, are at risk of unintended pregnancy. The app's pregnancy features, such as weekly fetal development content and symptom logging, are informational and are not a substitute for prenatal care.
Support or Replacement for Clinical Care
The app can support care when a patient brings her logged cycle dates to an appointment, which helps date a pregnancy or evaluate irregular bleeding. It cannot replace care, and it does not tell a user with warning signs, such as heavy bleeding or severe pain in early pregnancy, to seek care promptly in a way the writer found clear. It offers an in-app chat with health content, which is not staffed by clinicians.
How the Review Was Done
The writer installed the app on a personal phone, created an account with a new email address and logged invented data for two weeks, including period dates, symptoms and a simulated positive pregnancy test, to see what the app asked for and how it responded. The writer read the full privacy policy and terms of service, noted every category of data collected and every class of recipient named, and checked the app's settings for options to limit sharing. No real personal health information was entered. The review did not include a technical analysis of network traffic, which would be needed to confirm what the app actually transmits, as opposed to what its policy permits; the verdict is therefore based on what the company says it may do, which is the information available to an ordinary user deciding whether to trust it.
The same method would work for the other apps patients ask about most often, such as blood glucose logs and blood pressure trackers, and the clinic could build a short list of reviewed apps over time rather than answering each question from scratch.
Verdict
Against the five criteria, the verdict is a qualified recommendation with advice attached. For the user's main purpose, tracking cycles and planning a pregnancy, the app is useful and its predictions are adequate for women with regular cycles. On privacy, it fails the standard a nurse should apply to health information, because its policy allows sharing and its data are not protected by HIPAA. The recommendation to patients is therefore conditional: use a tracking app if it helps, choose one that stores data only on the phone or offers end-to-end encryption and does not share data for advertising, read the settings for data sharing and turn them off, and do not rely on fertile-window predictions for contraception. The clinic should prepare a one-page handout with these points so that every nurse gives the same answer.
References
Alfawzan, N., Christen, M., Spitale, G., & Biller-Andorno, N. (2022). Privacy, data sharing, and data security policies of women's mHealth apps: Scoping review and content analysis. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 10(5), Article e33735. https://doi.org/10.2196/33735
Federal Trade Commission. (2021, June 22). FTC finalizes order with Flo Health, a fertility-tracking app that shared sensitive health data with Facebook, Google, and others [Press release]. https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2021/06/ftc-finalizes-order-flo-health-fertility-tracking-app-shared-sensitive-health-data-facebook-google
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2022). Protecting the privacy and security of your health information when using your personal cell phone or tablet. https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/guidance/cell-phone-hipaa/index.html
The Chamberlain NR 361 Week 6 instructions
The Week 6 assignment asks you to review a mobile health app that patients might use. The instructions typically list the app's purpose and intended user, its features, evaluation against criteria such as accuracy, usability, privacy and evidence, its role in care, a recommendation and APA references. Fix the user and the category first. Write your criteria down before you open the app. Describe what the user actually does, not what the store listing promises. Check where the data goes and whether HIPAA applies. Judge predictions or advice against evidence. Say whether the app supports or replaces clinical care. Describe how you tested it, and end with advice a nurse could give tomorrow.
How the NR 361 Week 6 example is put together
The first section describes a user in her twenties or thirties tracking her cycle and planning a pregnancy, and lists the five criteria. The next section explains how daily logging changes what the app knows. The data section reports a privacy policy of more than 4,000 words that allows sharing, explains why HIPAA does not cover most consumer apps, and cites the FTC's 2021 order and Alfawzan and colleagues. The accuracy section explains that period predictions are usually close for regular cycles while fertile-window predictions are less reliable. The care section shows how logged dates help at appointments. The method section describes two weeks of invented data. The verdict recommends tracking apps conditionally, with privacy settings and no use for contraception.
Reading the NR 361 Week 6 grading rubric
App review rubrics in this course generally score the description of the app and user, the evaluation criteria, privacy and security analysis, accuracy and evidence, the role in patient care, a recommendation that follows from them, and APA. The criteria and privacy rows are most decisive, and the review earns them by writing criteria before testing and showing exactly what leaves the phone. Privacy analysis is credited for explaining why HIPAA does not apply and backing the concern with an FTC order and a scoping review. Accuracy scores when predictions are judged by cycle regularity. The care row is met by showing how the app supports visits without replacing them. The verdict earns points because it follows the criteria and ends with patient advice and a clinic handout.
NR 361 Week 6 help from the desk
The costliest review is the store listing rewritten in paragraphs, where every sentence comes from the developer and nothing is tested. Close behind are criteria assembled after the fact to justify a liking for the app. Students also assume HIPAA protects app data, or skip privacy entirely. Star ratings in place of a verdict, or a verdict with no advice for patients, lose recommendation points. Install the app if you can, using invented data rather than your own. Reviewing an app tied to your employer's vendor is allowed if you say so. If you have a different app patients ask about, name its category and user and an NR 361 review can be set up with criteria first.
Get a NR 361 Week 6 example written to your instructions
Send the Week 6 instructions, including any criteria list your section publishes, and name the app if one has been assigned to you. A custom example is written to those criteria and returned inside 24 to 48 hours, and the first one is free. If the choice is yours, we will suggest a category that gives the review something to argue with.
More NR 361 papers and RN-to-BSN samples
- NR 361 Week 1: Downstream Data Entry Discussion
- NR 361 Week 2: Penicillin Allergy EHR Workflow
- NR 361 Week 3: Continuous Pulse Oximetry Evaluation
- NR 361 Week 4: Tele-ICU Literature Review Matrix
- NR 361 Week 5: Pediatric Telephone Triage Analysis
- NR 361 Week 7: Informatics Project Proposal
- NR 361 Week 8: Reflection
- NR 393 Week 6: Historical Analysis
- NR 360 Week 6: Patient Portal INR Teaching Handout
- NR 394 Week 6: Cultural Group Analysis
- NR 351 Week 6: Nurse Staffing Article Summary
NR 361 Week 6 questions, answered
Do I have to install the app to review it?
It helps and it is not always possible, since some applications require a device, a subscription or a diagnosis. Where you cannot use it, say so and lean harder on published evaluations, the terms of use and any independent testing. What you must not do is describe an interface you never saw as though you had, because invented detail is easy for a grader who has used it to spot.
Where does patient privacy belong in a review like this?
In the section tracking where the data goes, written from what the published terms actually say. A general statement that health information should be protected is true and costs you the paragraph. The useful version reports that readings leave the device, names who receives them, and states what the terms permit that recipient to do next. That is a finding rather than a sentiment.
Can I review an app made by my employer's vendor?
Usually, though it narrows what you can safely write. Anything internal, contractual or specific to your facility stays yours to keep out, and the review works fine without it. Judge the version a patient could download, keep the employer unnamed, and if your own experience with it shapes the verdict, present that as your observation rather than as evidence a reader could check.
Where can I find a free NR 361 Week 6 sample paper?
This page shows the complete Week 6 review of a cycle tracking app, the five criteria, the privacy and HIPAA analysis, accuracy, the review method, the qualified verdict and three references.
Does HIPAA protect data in the app reviewed in NR 361 Week 6?
No. Most consumer health apps are not covered because the developer is not a provider, health plan or clearinghouse, which is why the review checks the privacy policy and sharing settings.