Cited by 58Digital Mental Health InterventionsMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsInnovative Human-Technology Interaction

A multi-faceted approach to characterizing user behavior and experience in a digital mental health intervention

Open access
Chen, Annie T., Wu, Shuyang, Tomasino, Kathryn N., Lattie, Emily G., Mohr, David C.·2019·Journal of Biomedical Informatics

Abstract

Digital interventions offer great promise for supporting health-related behavior change. However, there is much that we have yet to learn about how people respond to them. In this study, we present a novel mixed-methods approach to analysis of the complex and rich data that digital interventions collect. We perform secondary analysis of IntelliCare, an intervention in which participants are able to try 14 different mental health apps over the course of eight weeks. The goal of our analysis is to characterize users' app use behavior and experiences, and is rooted in theoretical conceptualizations of engagement as both usage and user experience. In the first aim, we employ cluster analysis to identify subgroups of participants that share similarities in terms of the frequency of their usage of particular apps, and then employ other engagement measures to compare the clusters. We identified four clusters with different app usage patterns: Low Usage, High Usage, Daily Feats Users, and Day to Day users. Each cluster was distinguished by its overall frequency of app use, or the main app that participants used. In the second aim, we developed a computer-assisted text analysis and visualization method - message highlighting - to facilitate comparison of the clusters. Last, we performed a qualitative analysis using participant messages to better understand the mechanisms of change and usability of salient apps from the cluster analysis. Our novel approach, integrating text and visual analytics with more traditional qualitative analysis techniques, can be used to generate insights concerning the behavior and experience of users in digital health contexts, for subsequent personalization and to identify areas for improvement of intervention technologies.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103187

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The length of the program and the length of individual sessions play a role in participants' satisfaction and motivation to continue with the program.

    “The length of the program as well as the length of individual sessions played a role in participants’ satisfaction and their motivation to continue with the program [88,138,147-151].”

    From Barriers to and facilitators of user engagement with digital mental health interventions: Systematic review (2021) · cites this paper as [149]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) suggests that shorter activity bursts might help the Low Usage group, offering limited support for a link between activity length and continued engagement. It does not report that either the overall program length or individual session length affected participants’ satisfaction or motivation to continue; the eight-week duration is described in Methods and Results, not evaluated as a factor. (LLM, conf=0.79)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Usability issues formed a barrier to engaging with an intervention.

    “Usability issues formed a barrier to engaging with an intervention [46,50, 78,84,148-150,157,159,170,224-228].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 61 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [33]Honkanen P, Frewer L. Russian consumers’ motives for food choice. Appetite 2009 4; 52(2): 363– 371. [doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2008.11.009] 19073227 · DOI
  2. [52]Bennett-Levy J, Richards D, Farrand P, Christensen H, Griffiths K, Kavanagh D, Klein B, Lau MA, Proudfoot J, Ritterband L, White J, Williams C. Oxford Guide to Low Intensity CBT Interventions. OUP Oxford; 2010 ISBN:978-0-19-102935-6

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chen, A. T., Wu, S., Tomasino, K. N., Lattie, E. G., & Mohr, D. C.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
Corresponding author
Chen, Annie T.
Venue
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-06
Volume
94
Pages
103187
ISSN
1532-0464 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2940596780
Cited by
58
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 1
FWCI
8.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Biomedical Informatics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • NIMH (R01 MH100482, K08 MH112878)
  • National Institute of Mental Health
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
Keywords
digital mental health interventions, user engagement, app usage behavior, user experience, mental health apps, mechanisms of change, usability, personalization
MeSH terms
Attitude to Computers, Mental Disorders, Humans, Mental Health, Telemedicine, Mobile Applications

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