Cited by 274Digital Mental Health InterventionsMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsMental Health Research Topics

Community Attitudes to the Appropriation of Mobile Phones for Monitoring and Managing Depression, Anxiety, and Stress

Open access
Proudfoot, Judith, Parker, Gordon, Hadzi Pavlovic, Dusan, Manicavasagar, Vijaya, Adler, Einat, Whitton, Alexis·2010·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The benefits of self-monitoring on symptom severity, coping, and quality of life have been amply demonstrated. However, paper and pencil self-monitoring can be cumbersome and subject to biases associated with retrospective recall, while computer-based monitoring can be inconvenient in that it relies on users being at their computer at scheduled monitoring times. As a result, nonadherence in self-monitoring is common. Mobile phones offer an alternative. Their take-up has reached saturation point in most developed countries and is increasing in developing countries; they are carried on the person, they are usually turned on, and functionality is continually improving. Currently, however, public conceptions of mobile phones focus on their use as tools for communication and social identity. Community attitudes toward using mobile phones for mental health monitoring and self-management are not known. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to explore community attitudes toward the appropriation of mobile phones for mental health monitoring and management. METHODS: We held community consultations in Australia consisting of an online survey (n = 525), focus group discussions (n = 47), and interviews (n = 20). RESULTS: Respondents used their mobile phones daily and predominantly for communication purposes. Of those who completed the online survey, the majority (399/525 or 76%) reported that they would be interested in using their mobile phone for mental health monitoring and self-management if the service were free. Of the 455 participants who owned a mobile phone or PDA, there were no significant differences between those who expressed interest in the use of mobile phones for this purpose and those who did not by gender (χ2(1), = 0.98, P = .32, phi = .05), age group (χ2(4), = 1.95, P = .75, phi = .06), employment status (χ2(2), = 2.74, P = .25, phi = .08) or marital status (χ2(4), = 4.62, P = .33, phi = .10). However, the presence of current symptoms of depression, anxiety, or stress affected interest in such a program in that those with symptoms were more interested (χ(2) (1), = 16.67, P < .001, phi = .19). Reasons given for interest in using a mobile phone program were that it would be convenient, counteract isolation, and help identify triggers to mood states. Reasons given for lack of interest included not liking to use a mobile phone or technology, concerns that it would be too intrusive or that privacy would be lacking, and not seeing the need. Design features considered to be key by participants were enhanced privacy and security functions including user name and password, ease of use, the provision of reminders, and the availability of clear feedback. CONCLUSIONS: Community attitudes toward the appropriation of mobile phones for the monitoring and self-management of depression, anxiety, and stress appear to be positive as long as privacy and security provisions are assured, the program is intuitive and easy to use, and the feedback is clear.

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/jmir.1475

Cites

16 of 16 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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [2]Proudfoot J Nicholas J Bennett-Levy J Richards D Farrand P Christensen H Griffiths K Kavanagh DJ Klein B Lau M Proudfoot J Monitoring and evaluation in low intensity CBT interventions Oxford Guide to Low Intensity CBT Interventions (Oxford Guides in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy) 2010 Oxford, England Oxford University Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Proudfoot, J., Parker, G., Hadzi Pavlovic, D., Manicavasagar, V., Adler, E., & Whitton, A.
Affiliations
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • Black Dog Institute (AU)
Corresponding author
Proudfoot, Judith
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2010-12-19
Volume
12
Issue
5
Pages
e64
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1996685790
Cited by
274
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 6
FWCI
11.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Australian Government
  • Medical Research Council
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (510135)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
Keywords
phones, depression, anxiety, stress, self-monitoring, self-management, community attitudes, mobile health, mental health service utilization, technology adoption barriers, social stigma, privacy concerns, community consultation, South America, Pacific Islands
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Anxiety, Attitude to Health, Australia, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self Concept, Stress, Psychological, Monitoring, Ambulatory, Privacy, Cell Phone, Young Adult

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