Cited by 43Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and Access

Predictors of Participant Retention in a Guided Online Self-Help Program for University Students: Prospective Cohort Study

Open access
Wojtowicz, Magdalena, Day, Victor, McGrath, Patrick J·2013·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Attrition is a persistent issue in online self-help programs, but limited research is available on reasons for attrition or successful methods for improving participant retention. One potential approach to understanding attrition and retention in such programs is to examine person-related variables (eg, beliefs and attitudes) that influence behavior. Theoretical models, such as the Theory of Planned Behavior, that describe conditions influencing human behavior may provide a useful framework for predicting participant retention in online-based program. OBJECTIVE: We examined predictors of participant retention in a guided online anxiety, depression, and stress self-help program for university students using the theory of planned behavior. We also explored whether age, symptom severity, and type of coaching (ie, email vs phone) affected participant retention. METHODS: 65 university students with mild to moderate depression, anxiety, and stress were enrolled in this prospective cohort study. Participants completed a questionnaire based on the theory of planned behavior prior to commencing the online-based program and the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS) during the assessment module of the program. Participant retention was operationalized as the number of program modules completed. RESULTS: Perceived control over completing the online program significantly predicted intention to complete the program (F3,62=6.7; P=.001; adjusted R(2)=.2; standardized beta=.436, P=.001). Age (standardized beta=.319, P=.03) and perceived behavioral control (standardized beta=.295, P=.05) predicted the number of program modules completed (F3,61=3.20, P=.03, adjusted R(2) =.11). Initial level of distress (ie, symptom severity) did not predict participant retention (P=.55). Participants who chose phone-based coaching completed more program modules than participants who chose email-based coaching (Mann-Whitney's U=137; P=.004). CONCLUSIONS: Participants' age, level of perceived behavioral control, and choice of interaction (ie, phone-based or email-based coaching) were found to influence retention in this online-based program.

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.2323

Cites

37 of 37 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?

  • Previous efforts to identify nontechnological factors influencing attrition in online interventions have yielded inconclusive results.

    “although previous efforts to identify nontechnological factors influencing attrition in online interventions have yielded inconclusive results [71-75].”
  • Because there was systematic attrition in this trial, the significant differences between completers and dropouts may provide valuable information to identify focal points for targeted attrition reduction.

    “Because there was systematic attrition in this trial, the significant differences between completers and dropouts may provide valuable information to identify focal points for targeted attrition reduction, although previous efforts to identify nontechnological factors influencing attrition in online interventions have yielded inconclusive results [71-75].”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wojtowicz, M., Day, V., & McGrath, P. J.
Affiliations
Dalhousie University (CA)
Corresponding author
Wojtowicz, Magdalena
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2013-05-22
Volume
15
Issue
5
Pages
e96
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1986446865
Cited by
43
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 1
FWCI
6.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Nova Scotia Health Research Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
participant retention, attrition, online self-help program, guided self-help, university students, anxiety, depression, stress, theory of planned behavior, perceived behavioral control, perceived control, phone coaching, symptom severity, age
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Animals, Anxiety, Depression, Humans, Prospective Studies, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self-Help Groups, Stress, Psychological, Students, Universities, Internet, Mice, 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