Skip to main content
KBS_Icon_questionmark link-ico
Phone app ;

Why do we stop using health apps, and is that always a problem?

Jeni Baykoca

PhD Student

12 August 2026

Jeni Baykoca is a PhD Student in the Department of Psychology at the IoPPN . Her research focuses on developing the psychological distress programme within Navigate MS, an evidence-based mobile health intervention designed to support people living with multiple sclerosis. As part of this work, she explored what helps people living with long-term conditions engage with mobile health apps through an overview of systematic reviews, recently published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth. In this blog, she shares some of the key findings and what they could mean for the design of more engaging digital health interventions.

Most of us have downloaded a health app with good intentions. For a few days, we log meals, track symptoms, practice breathing exercises, or complete daily goals. Then life gets busy, the notifications become irritating, and the app quietly disappears into a folder we rarely open.

When this happens with a health app, it is tempting to describe the user as “disengaged”. But that word can hide more than it explains. Did the app fail to feel relevant? Was it difficult to use during a symptom flare? Did entering data become another task on an already challenging day? Or had the person simply gained what they needed and no longer required it?

These questions were at the heart of our recently published overview of systematic reviews on engagement with mobile health apps for adults living with long-term physical health conditions, in JMIR mHealth and uHealth. We brought together 19 systematic reviews, covering 262 individual studies and 98 health apps, to understand how engagement is defined, whether it is linked to better health outcomes, and what helps people continue using an app.

Exploring the findings beyond the numbers

One of the main findings was that researchers often talk about engagement without clearly defining it. Almost three-quarters of the reviews did not provide a definition, while others treated engagement as the same thing as usage or adherence. In practice, this meant counting logins, minutes spent in an app, or tasks completed.

Those numbers can be useful, but they only tell us what happened on the screen. They do not tell us whether an app became meaningfully integrated into someone’s life, whether the person found its content valuable, or whether they used it enough to benefit. A person who opens an app every day is not necessarily deeply engaged; equally, someone who uses it only when symptoms worsen may be using it exactly as intended.

This matters because digital health should not become another space in which people living with long-term conditions are made to feel like they have failed. When an app is abandoned, the problem is not automatically a lack of motivation. The design may have asked too much, offered too little, or failed to fit the realities of living with fluctuating symptoms, work, caring responsibilities and everyday life. – Jeni Baykoca

Looking at engagement through a motivational lens

To look beyond simple usage figures, we interpreted the findings through Self-Determination Theory. This suggests that motivation is more likely to last when people feel a sense of autonomy, competence, and relatedness.

For an app, autonomy means feeling that its use is personally relevant and under your control. People need flexibility, meaningful choices and reminders that support rather than nag. Competence means feeling capable of using the app: clear language, accessible design, useful feedback and reliable technology all matter. Relatedness is about trust and connection, whether through supportive language, clinician endorsement, peer interaction, or secure links with people involved in someone’s care.

External conditions still matter. People cannot engage with an app they cannot afford, access or use because of poor connectivity. But these factors are more like the front door: they allow someone to enter, while the experience inside determines whether they stay. – Jeni Baykoca

Deeper reflection and recommendations

This research has directly shaped how I think about my PhD work developing the psychological distress programme of Navigate MS, a self-guided mobile app platform for people living with multiple sclerosis. It is easy during development to focus on how much content an app contains. However, a question that is equally important is whether that content arrives in a form that respects people’s time, abilities, priorities, and changing needs.

Our paper therefore includes practical recommendations for researchers, clinicians, and developers. These include reducing unnecessary data entry, allowing people to personalise goals and reminders, using clear and non-stigmatising language, designing for different levels of digital confidence, and involving intended users throughout development. Engagement should not be added at the end as a feature; it should be built into the foundations.

Final thoughts

The goal is not to create an app that people cannot put down. Health apps are not social media platforms, and more screen time is not automatically better. The goal is to create support that people can trust, return to when it is useful, and fit around their lives.

Perhaps the most helpful question is not, “How do we make people use this app more?” It is, “How do we make this app worth using?”– Jeni Baykoca

Read the paper: 'Mechanisms of Engagement With Mobile Health Apps for Adults With Long-Term Conditions: Overview of Systematic Reviews' J.Baykoca et al.

The research was funded by the UK MS Society and part funded by the National Institute of Health and Care Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre (BRC): Maudsley.

 

 

In this story

Jeni Baykoca

Jeni Baykoca

PhD Student

Latest news