Cited by 790Digital Mental Health InterventionsMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsMental Health and Patient Involvement

Clinical review of user engagement with mental health smartphone apps: evidence, theory and improvements

Open access
Torous, John, Nicholas, Jennifer, Larsen, Mark E, Firth, Joseph, Christensen, Helen·2018·Evidence Based Mental Health

Abstract

The potential of smartphone apps to improve quality and increase access to mental health care is increasingly clear. Yet even in the current global mental health crisis, real-world uptake of smartphone apps by clinics or consumers remains low. To understand this dichotomy, this paper reviews current challenges surrounding user engagement with mental health smartphone apps. While smartphone engagement metrics and reporting remains heterogeneous in the literature, focusing on themes offers a framework to identify underlying trends. These themes suggest that apps are not designed with service users in mind, do not solve problems users care most about, do not respect privacy, are not seen as trustworthy and are unhelpful in emergencies. Respecting these current issues surrounding mental health app engagement, we propose several solutions and highlight successful examples of mental health apps with high engagement. Further research is necessary to better characterise engagement with mental health apps and identify best practices for design, testing and implementation.

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 · 10.1136/eb-2018-102891

Cites

40 of 40 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?

  • This multi-modal approach allows for personal engagement and increases the utilization of digitally delivered interventions, which have been demonstrated to have a steep drop off in utilization when delivered alone.

    “This multi-modal approach allows for personal engagement and also increases the utilization of digitally delivered interventions, which have been demonstrated to have a steep drop off in utilization when delivered alone [54].”

    From Skills to Enhance Positivity in adolescents at risk for suicide: Protocol for a randomized controlled trial (2023) · cites this paper as [54]

    The Improving App Engagement section says clinician or peer involvement and integration into care settings can enhance app engagement; it also describes a highly adhered-to app that was not a stand-alone service. The Methods section reports a sharp drop-off in use of some mental health apps. But the review frames the benefit of added support as emerging evidence or potential, rather than demonstrating that a multi-modal approach increases utilization compared with delivery alone. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Patient adherence may be improved by providing evidence-based solutions such as 24/7 access to educational information and resources, personalized support, and targeted interventions and skills training via technology.

    “Patient adherence may also be improved by providing evidence-based solutions such as 24/7 access to educational information and resources, personalized support, and targeted interventions and skills training via technology (eg, apps or websites) [21,35] in the comfort of their own homes [20,30].”

    From A Digital Mental Health Support Program for Depression and Anxiety in Populations With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Feasibility and Usability Study (2023) · cites this paper as [30]

    The “Improving app engagement” section says health education and clinician or peer support may increase engagement, and that embedding apps in users’ settings can enhance adherence (page not provided). It does not establish that 24/7 access, personalized support, or targeted skills training as a package improves patient adherence. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Digital interventions have the potential to evoke changes unavailable in traditional methods because of the ability to design personalized treatment models and measure engagement.

    “Digital interventions have the potential to evoke changes unavailable in traditional methods because of the ability to design personalized treatment models and measure engagement [28-30].”

    From A Digital Mental Health Support Program for Depression and Anxiety in Populations With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Feasibility and Usability Study (2023) · cites this paper as [30]

    The Additional information section (page unavailable) says smartphone apps may transform psychiatric care, and Poor usability describes a customised symptom tracker. The Methods section reports app-usage data as a way to assess engagement, but also says such data are scarce. The paper does not establish that these capabilities produce changes unavailable through traditional methods. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Even when the app is downloaded, some users never use it, and those who engage with the app are unlikely to do so more than a few times, showing a decrease in use over time.

    “Even when the app is downloaded, studies show that some users never use it, and those who engage with the app are unlikely to do so more than a few times, showing a decrease in use over time [49,50].”

    From App-Based Mindfulness Meditation for People of Color Who Experience Race-Related Stress: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial (2022) · cites this paper as [50]

    The Methods section reports that only 14% of PTSD Coach downloaders used it the following day and that use of a schizophrenia symptom-tracking app dropped off, with users unlikely to continue more than a few times. It does not establish that some people who downloaded an app never used it; its separate example of people who never downloaded a study app does not support that part of the claim. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • There is evidence of low treatment adherence in self-directed app-based mindfulness meditation.

    “Given the evidence of low treatment adherence in self-directed app-based mindfulness meditation [49-51], we will use a combination of app and text messaging reminders.”

    From App-Based Mindfulness Meditation for People of Color Who Experience Race-Related Stress: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial (2022) · cites this paper as [50]

    The Methods section reports rapid drop-off in use of mental health apps, and Improving App Engagement describes adherence as a challenge for digital interventions. The review does not establish low treatment adherence specifically for self-directed app-based mindfulness meditation; its mention of mindfulness apps concerns their clinical quality, not adherence. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

1 of the 41 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Torous, J., Nicholas, J., Larsen, M. E., Firth, J., & Christensen, H.
Affiliations
  • Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
  • Black Dog Institute (AU)
  • Western Sydney University (AU)
Corresponding author
Torous, John
Venue
Evidence Based Mental Health
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2018-06-05
Volume
21
Issue
3
Pages
116-119
ISSN
  • 1362-0347 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-960X
OpenAlex
W2806313543
Cited by
790
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 99 · 2025: 135 · 2024: 103 · 2023: 96 · 2022: 106 · 2021: 119 · 2020: 68 · 2019: 57 · 2018: 7
FWCI
8.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Evidence-Based Mental Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression
  • National Institute of Mental Health (K23MH116130)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mental Health and Patient Involvement
Keywords
mental health apps, mobile application, user engagement, engagement metrics, mobile application design, privacy, trust, emergency relief, digital mental health, app uptake
MeSH terms
Smartphone, Mental Disorders, Humans, Mental Health Services, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Patient Participation, 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