Use of Smartphones, Computers and Social Media Among People with SMI: Opportunity for Intervention
Open accessAbstract
Mobile technology provides a unique opportunity to expand access to evidence-based interventions. The objective of this study was to provide an update regarding use of technology in people with serious mental illness (SMI). In 2017, 403 people in treatment for SMI were surveyed. Technology use was common: 65.8% used a smartphone, 53.6% used the Internet on a computer or tablet in the past 6 months, and over two thirds (67.9%) used social media. Rates of technology and Facebook use were similar to rates among low-income Americans. Approximately three quarters were willing to use a device to access interventions for stress, health and mental health. Younger adults were more likely to use most forms of technology and social media compared to older adults, but willingness to try technology-delivered interventions did not vary by age. This survey supports the rationale for ongoing development and testing of digital interventions for people with SMI.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Individuals living with a range of mental disorders, including depression, psychotic disorders, or other severe mental illnesses, use social media platforms at comparable rates as the general population, with use ranging from about 70% among middle-age and older individuals to upwards of 97% among younger individuals.
“Studies have reported that individuals living with a range of mental disorders, including depression, psychotic disorders, or other severe mental illnesses, use social media platforms at comparable rates as the general population”
From Social Media and Mental Health: Benefits, Risks, and Opportunities for Research and Practice (2020) · cites this paper as Brunette et al., 2019
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredRates of social media use among psychiatric populations have increased in recent years.
“Rates of social media use among psychiatric populations have increased in recent years”
From Social Media and Mental Health: Benefits, Risks, and Opportunities for Research and Practice (2020) · cites this paper as Brunette et al., 2019
The Discussion concludes that a growing number of people with serious mental illness use social media, supporting the direction of the claim. But it frames this as a suggestion from survey data, not a measured increase in social-media-use rates over time, and it concerns people with serious mental illness rather than psychiatric populations generally. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn data from 2017, approximately 70% of individuals with serious mental illness in treatment used social media, comparable to low-income groups from the general population.
“as reflected in a study with data from 2017 showing comparable rates of social media use (approximately 70%) among individuals with serious mental illness in treatment as compared to low-income groups from the general population (Brunette et al., 2019).”
From Social Media and Mental Health: Benefits, Risks, and Opportunities for Research and Practice (2020) · cites this paper as Brunette et al., 2019
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 21 · Cited by 67
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- Aschbrenner KA, Naslund JA, & Bartels SJ (2016). Technology-Supported Peer-to-Peer Intervention for People With Serious Mental Illness. Psychiatr Serv, 67(8), 928– 929. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.670801 27476896 · DOI
- Ben-Zeev D, Drake R, & Marsch L (2015). Clinical technology specialists. Bmj, 350, h945. 25697164
- Brunette MF, Ferron JC, Drake RE, Devitt TS, Geiger PT, McHugo GJ, … Cook JA (2013). Carbon monoxide feedback in a motivational decision support system for nicotine dependence among smokers with severe mental illnesses. J Subst Abuse Treat, 45(4), 319– 324. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2013.04.005 23706623 · DOI
- Brunette MF, Ferron JC, Gottlieb J, Devitt T, & Rotondi A (2016). Development and usability testing of a web-based smoking cessation treatment for smokers with schizophrenia. Internet Interventions, 4, 113– 119. doi: 10.1016/j.invent.2016.05.003 30135797 PMC6096117 · DOI
- Brunette MF, Rotondi AJ, Ben-Zeev D, Gottlieb JD, Mueser KT, Robinson DG, … Kane JM (2016). Coordinated Technology-Delivered Treatment to Prevent Rehospitalization in Schizophrenia: A Novel Model of Care. Psychiatr Serv, 67(4), 444– 447. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201500257 26725297 · DOI
- Deady M, Mills KL, Teesson M, & Kay-Lambkin F (2016). An Online Intervention for Co-Occurring Depression and Problematic Alcohol Use in Young People: Primary Outcomes From a Randomized Controlled Trial. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 18(3), e71. doi: 10.2196/jmir.5178 27009465 PMC4823588 · DOI · Paper page
- Firth J, Cotter J, Torous J, Bucci S, Firth JA, & Yung AR (2015). Mobile Phone Ownership and Endorsement of “mHealth” Among People With Psychosis: A Meta-analysis of Cross-sectional Studies. Schizophr Bull. doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbv132 PMC4753601 26400871 · DOI · Paper page
- Hodges CA, O’Brien MS, & McGorry PD (2007). headspace: National Youth Mental Health Foundation: making headway with rural young people and their mental health. Aust J Rural Health, 15(2), 77– 80. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1584.2007.00868.x 17441814 · DOI
- Kessler RC, Chiu WT, Demler O, Merikangas KR, & Walters EE (2005). Prevalence, severity, and comorbidity of 12-month DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Archives of General Psychiatry, 62(6), 617– 627. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.62.6.617 15939839 PMC2847357 · DOI · Paper page
- Miller BJ, Stewart A, Schrimsher J, Peeples D, & Buckley PF (2015). How connected are people with schizophrenia? Cell phone, computer, email, and social media use. Psychiatry Res, 225(3), 458– 463. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2014.11.067 25563669 · DOI · Paper page
- Naslund JA, Aschbrenner KA, Scherer EA, McHugo GJ, Marsch LA, & Bartels SJ (2016). Wearable devices and mobile technologies for supporting behavioral weight loss among people with serious mental illness. Psychiatry Res, 244, 139– 144. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2016.06.056 27479104 PMC5026936 · DOI · Paper page
- Pratt SI, Bartels SJ, Mueser KT, Naslund JA, Wolfe R, Pixley HS, & Josephson L (2013). Feasibility and effectiveness of an automated telehealth intervention to improve illness self-management in people with serious psychiatric and medical disorders. Psychiatr Rehabil J, 36(4), 297– 305. doi: 10.1037/prj0000022 24320837 PMC5472060 · DOI
- Pratt SI, Naslund JA, Wolfe RS, Santos M, & Bartels SJ (2015). Automated telehealth for managing psychiatric instability in people with serious mental illness. J Ment Health, 24(5), 261– 265. doi: 10.3109/09638237.2014.928403 24988132 PMC5506829 · DOI
- Sandoval LR, Torous J, & Keshavan MS (2017). Smartphones for Smarter Care? Self-Management in Schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry, 174(8), 725– 728. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2017.16090990 28760015 · DOI
- Authors
- Brunette, M. F., Achtyes, E., Pratt, S., Stilwell, K., Opperman, M., Guarino, S., & Kay-Lambkin, F.
- Affiliations
- Dartmouth College (US)
- Pine Rest Christian Mental Health Services (US)
- Michigan State University (US)
- Indiana University School of Medicine (US)
- Corresponding author
- Brunette, M.F.
- Venue
- Community Mental Health Journal
- Published
- 2019-06-08
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 973-978
- ISSN
- 0010-3853 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-2789
- PMC
- PMC7534532
- OpenAlex
- W2959711199
- Cited by
- 67
- References
- 21
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 9.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Community Mental Health Journal (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
- Purdue University Indianapolis (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
- NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia) (submittedVersion)
- Author eBooks
- Funders
- Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute (CA168778-01A1)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
- Keywords
- severe mental illness, smartphone use, social media use, digital interventions, technology-based interventions, Facebook use, internet use, willingness to use technology, age differences, psychotherapy
- MeSH terms
- Smartphone, Adult, Aged, Mental Disorders, Community Mental Health Centers, Computers, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, United States, Social Media
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
