Cited by 43Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesUsability and User Interface Design

Online Support and Intervention for Child Anxiety (OSI): Development and Usability Testing

Open access
Hill, Claire, Reardon, Tessa, Taylor, Lucy, Creswell, Cathy·2022·JMIR Formative Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: Internet-based treatments for child anxiety may help to increase access to evidence-based therapies; however, user engagement, uptake, and adherence within routine clinical practice remain as challenges. Involving the intended end users in the development process through user-centered design and usability testing is crucial for maximizing user engagement and adoption of internet-based treatments, but so far this has been lacking for internet-based treatments for child anxiety. Objective: The aim of this study is to develop an internet-based treatment for child anxiety through a process of user-centered design (phase 1) and usability testing (phase 2), based on an existing evidence-based, face-to-face, therapist-supported, parent-led cognitive behavioral therapy intervention. It is intended that the internet-based version of this treatment would consist of a parent website, case management system for clinicians, and mobile game app for children. Methods: Parents, children, and clinicians who were familiar with the face-to-face version of the treatment were recruited from 2 National Health Service clinics. In phase 1, participants participated in 3 workshops to gain feedback on the overall concept, explore their wants and needs for the websites and game, generate ideas on how the treatment may look, and gain feedback on initial mock-ups of the websites and game. In phase 2, participants attended 3 individual usability testing sessions where they were presented with working prototypes of the website or game and asked to perform a series of tasks on the website (parents and clinicians) or play the game (children). The frequency and details on usability errors were recorded. Participants were asked for their feedback on the website and game using a standardized usability questionnaire and semistructured interviews. The websites and game were iterated after each round of usability testing in response to this feedback. Results: In phase 1, participants approved the general concept and rated the initial mock-ups of the website and game positively. In phase 2, working prototypes were rated positively and usability errors declined across the iterations and were mainly cosmetic or minor issues relating to esthetic preference, with few issues regarding ability to navigate the website or technical issues affecting functionality. Feedback from the semistructured interviews further supported the positive response of participants to the website and game, and helped identify areas for improvement during the iteration process. The final iteration of the website and game are presented. Conclusions: Taking an iterative approach to development through user-centered design and usability testing has resulted in an internet-based treatment for child anxiety (Online Support and Intervention for child anxiety) that appears to meet the needs and expectations of the intended users (parents, children, and clinicians) and is easy and enjoyable to use.

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 · 10.2196/29846

Cites

53 of 53 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?

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

3 of the 56 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [42]Rubin J Chisnell D Handbook of usability testing: how to plan, design, and conduct effective tests. 2nd edition 2008 Hoboken, NJ John Wiley & Sons
  2. [44]Online Support and Intervention for child anxiety 2022-03-18 https://osiresearch.org.uk/ PMC9047721 35416781
  3. [48]Law D Jacob J Goals and goal based outcomes (GBOs) 2013 London, UK CAMHS Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hill, C., Reardon, T., Taylor, L., & Creswell, C.
Affiliations
  • University of Reading (GB)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Hill, Claire
Venue
JMIR Formative Research
Published
2022-04-13
Volume
6
Issue
4
Pages
e29846
ISSN
2561-326X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4223487014
Cited by
43
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 12
FWCI
7.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Formative Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CentAUR (University of Reading) (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (RP_2014-04-018, NIHR201370)
  • Department of Health and Social Care
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
Keywords
online therapy, internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy, parent-led intervention, user-centered design, usability testing, case management systems, user engagement, iterative development

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