The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Insights from user reviews to improve mental health apps
Open accessAbstract
Mental health applications hold great promise as interventions for addressing common mental issues. Although many people with mental health issues use mobile app interventions, their adherence level remains low. Low engagement affects the effectiveness of mobile interventions. However, there is still a dearth of research to explain the reasons for low engagement. User experience and usability are two factors that determine the adoption and usage of apps. Analyzing user reviews of mobile apps for mental health issues reveals user experience and what features users liked and disliked in the apps and hence informs future app design and refinements. This research aims to analyze user reviews of publicly available mental health applications to uncover their strengths, weaknesses, and gaps, hence revealing why users are likely to cease using these applications. We mined reviews of 106 mental health apps retrieved from Apple’s App Store and Google Play and employed thematic analysis on 13,549 reviews. The review analysis shows that users placed more emphasis on the user interface and the user-friendliness of the app. Users also appreciated apps that present them with a variety of options, functionalities, and content that they can choose. Again, apps that offer adaptive functionalities that allow users to adapt some app features also received high ratings. In contrast, poor usability emerged as the most common reason for abandoning mental health apps. Other pitfalls include lack of a content variety, lack of personalization, lack of customer service and trust, and security and privacy issues.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Conversely, poor usability has emerged as the most common reason for abandoning mental health apps [39].”
In the citing paper
“Some independent research studies observed that often there is poor engagement from patients in continuing to use the apps after a few attempts [1];”
From A conversational artificial intelligence agent for a mental health care app: Evaluation study of its participatory design (2021) · cites this paper as [1]
In the citing paper
“DMHIs allow people to access psychotherapy skills and content in their own time and empower them to self-manage their symptoms [7-11].”
In the citing paper
“Many existing self-guided and guided DMHIs include linear, one-size-fits-all programs for a specific disorder (eg, major depressive disorder) or multiple disorders (eg, transdiagnostic programs for mixed anxiety or anxiety and depression).”
In the citing paper
“Several factors contribute to low DMHI engagement, including technical issues, motivation issues, and a lack of user-driven design [11,25,31,32].”
In the citing paper
“These findings are consistent with DMHI research conducted before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic [11,31,47,62], indicating these 3 factors should be considered in the design of DMHIs for depression and anxiety.”
In the citing paper
“This is an important consideration given that past research has found that the esthetic qualities of DMHI design are linked to better usability and user-friendliness [11,62].”
In the citing paper
“In qualitative interviews, participants emphasized that a DMHI should be backed by scientific research and developed by a reputable organization, consistent with previous research that showed that inadequate information about credibility can affect user trust in a DMHI [11].”
In the citing paper
“Consistent with previous research [11,31,62], participants wanted to personalize a DMHI to suit their needs and set goals.”
In the citing paper
“These findings are especially important, given that a lack of DMHI personalization is a common barrier to user engagement [25] and a common source of user dissatisfaction [11].”
In the citing paper
“Features that support social connectedness were also desired as an inclusion in past DMHIs [11,25], and the need for isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic may have exacerbated this need.”
In the citing paper
“This corresponds with existing research indicating that many studies have found that participants prefer free DMHIs [11], highlighting the need for future DMHIs to be accessed free of charge or at a low cost.”
Citations
Cites
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa · Cited by 194,414
Guest, G., MacQueen, K., & Namey, E. (2012) · doi:10.4135/9781483384436 · Cited by 7,924
Mental illness and/or mental health? Investigating axioms of the complete state model of health
Keyes, C. L. M. (2005) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.73.3.539 · Cited by 3,357
Mobile app rating scale: a new tool for assessing the quality of health mobile apps
Stoyanov, S. R., Hides, L., Kavanagh, D. J., Zelenko, O., Tjondronegoro, D., & Mani, M. (2015) · JMIR mHealth and uHealth · doi:10.2196/mhealth.3422 · Cited by 2,233
Persuasive Systems Design: Key Issues, Process Model, and System Features
Oinas-Kukkonen, H., & Harjumaa, M. (2009) · Communications of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1cais.02428 · Cited by 1,663
Smartphones for smarter delivery of mental health programs: A systematic review
Donker, T., Petrie, K., Proudfoot, J., Clarke, J., Birch, M.-R., & Christensen, H. (2013) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.2791 · Cited by 1,136
Torous, J., Nicholas, J., Larsen, M. E., Firth, J., & Christensen, H. (2018) · Evidence Based Mental Health · doi:10.1136/eb-2018-102891 · Cited by 790
Howells, A., Ivtzan, I., & Eiroa-Orosa, F. J. (2016) · Journal of Happiness Studies · doi:10.1007/s10902-014-9589-1 · Cited by 407
The WPA-Lancet psychiatry commission on the future of psychiatry
Bhugra, D., Tasman, A., Pathare, S., Priebe, S., Smith, S., Torous, J., Arbuckle, M. R., Langford, A., Alarcón, R. D., Chiu, H. F. K., et al. (2017) · The Lancet Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s2215-0366(17)30333-4 · Cited by 392
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- Nakashima J, Yamauchi Y, Kijima S, et al. Finding submodularity hidden in symmetric difference, 2017. https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.08721 · arXiv
- Alqahtani F, Proceedings of the UMAP’19 adjunct publication of the 27th conference on user modeling, adaptation and personalization, 343
- Knox M, 2011, Ment Health Fam Med, 8, 195
- Sunyaev A, 2014, J Am Med Inform Assoc, 22, e28
- Pagano D, Proceedings of the 2013 21st IEEE international requirements engineering conference, 125
- Stawarz K, Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference on Human factors in computing systems—CHI ’14, 2269
- Thach KS, Proceedings of the 2018 5th NAFOSTED conference on information and computer science (NICS), 47
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Haque, M. D. R., & Rubya, S. (2023) · JMIR mHealth and uHealth · doi:10.2196/44838 · Cited by 404
Saleem, M., Kühne, L., De Santis, K. K., Christianson, L., Brand, T., & Busse, H. (2021) · JMIR Mental Health · doi:10.2196/30000 · Cited by 199
Rathnayaka, P., Mills, N., Burnett, D., Silva, D. D., Alahakoon, D., & Gray, R. J. (2022) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s22103653 · Cited by 169
Potential and Pitfalls of Mobile Mental Health Apps in Traditional Treatment: An Umbrella Review
Koh, J., Tng, G. Y. Q., & Hartanto, A. (2022) · Journal of Personalized Medicine · doi:10.3390/jpm12091376 · Cited by 155
Chan, A. H. Y., & Honey, M. L. L. (2021) · Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing · doi:10.1111/jpm.12744 · Cited by 130
Metadata
- Authors
- Alqahtani, F., & Orji, R.
- Affiliations
- Dalhousie University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Alqahtani, Felwah
- Venue
- Health Informatics Journal
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2020-01-10
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 2042-2066
- ISSN
- 1355-4743 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-4582
- 1741-2811
- OpenAlex
- W2999181723
- Cited by
- 286
- References
- 27
- Citations by year
- 2026: 38 · 2025: 62 · 2024: 62 · 2023: 50 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 6
- FWCI
- 27.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Health Informatics Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- natural sciences and engineering research council of canada
- king khalid university
- 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 › Usability and User Interface Design
- Keywords
- mental health apps, online reviews, app abandonment, user engagement, usability, user experience, mobile health intervention, mobile application design, adaptive traits, personalization, privacy and security, customer service
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Mental Health, Privacy, 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
