Cited by 129Digital Mental Health InterventionsWorkplace Health and Well-beingMental Health Treatment and Access

Employees’ Perspectives on the Facilitators and Barriers to Engaging With Digital Mental Health Interventions in the Workplace: Qualitative Study

Open access
Carolan, Stephany, de Visser, Richard O·2018·JMIR Mental Health

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: Prevalence rates of work-related stress, depression, and anxiety are high, resulting in reduced productivity and increased absenteeism. There is evidence that these conditions can be successfully treated in the workplace, but take-up of psychological treatments among workers is low. Digital mental health interventions delivered in the workplace may be one way to address this imbalance, but although there is evidence that digital mental health is effective at treating stress, depression, and anxiety in the workplace, uptake of and engagement with these interventions remains a concern. Additionally, there is little research on the appropriateness of the workplace for delivering these interventions or on what the facilitators and barriers to engagement with digital mental health interventions in an occupational setting might be. Objective: The aim of this research was to get a better understanding of the facilitators and barriers to engaging with digital mental health interventions in the workplace. Methods: Semistructured interviews were held with 18 participants who had access to an occupational digital mental health intervention as part of a randomized controlled trial. The interviews were transcribed, and thematic analysis was used to develop an understanding of the data. Results: Digital mental health interventions were described by interviewees as convenient, flexible, and anonymous; these attributes were seen as being both facilitators and barriers to engagement in a workplace setting. Convenience and flexibility could increase the opportunities to engage with digital mental health, but in a workplace setting they could also result in difficulty in prioritizing time and ensuring a temporal and spatial separation between work and therapy. The anonymity of the Internet could encourage use, but that benefit may be lost for people who work in open-plan offices. Other facilitators to engagement included interactive and interesting content and design features such as progress trackers and reminders to log in. The main barrier to engagement was the lack of time. The perfect digital mental health intervention was described as a website that combined a short interactive course that was accessed alongside time-unlimited information and advice that was regularly updated and could be dipped in and out of. Participants also wanted access to e-coaching support. Conclusions: Occupational digital mental health interventions may have an important role in delivering health care support to employees. Although the advantages of digital mental health interventions are clear, they do not always fully translate to interventions delivered in an occupational setting and further work is required to identify ways of minimizing potential barriers to access and engagement. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02729987; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02729987?term=NCT02729987& rank=1 (Archived at WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6wZJge9rt)

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/mental.9146

Cites

66 of 66 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?

  • Participants expressed a need for more structured use of DMHIs (e.g., app reminders or a human coach checking on them regularly).

    “Participants expressed a need to receive more structured use, for example, through app reminders or a human coach checking on them on a regular basis [49,50,113,122,133,137,139,148,150,163,175-182].”

    From Barriers to and facilitators of user engagement with digital mental health interventions: Systematic review (2021) · cites this paper as [137]

    The Results section, “Facilitators to Engagement” (page not provided), says automated reminders and e-coach log-in prompts helped participants engage. However, “The Role of the E-Coach” says participants differed in how proactive they wanted the coach to be; it does not establish a general need for regular coach check-ins or more structured use. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Some participants were concerned about whether an intervention was truly anonymous if it was used in a small setting with a limited number of known users.

    “Other study participants were concerned about whether an intervention was truly anonymous if it was used in a small setting, with a limited number of known users [137].”

    From Barriers to and facilitators of user engagement with digital mental health interventions: Systematic review (2021) · cites this paper as [137]

    The Results section ('The Negatives of Digital Mental Health Interventions'; page unavailable) reports concern that colleagues in an open-plan office could see a participant’s screen. The Discussion ('Positives and Negatives of Digital Mental Health in the Workplace'; page unavailable) says anonymity was hard to maintain in that environment. Neither passage attributes the concern to a small setting with a limited number of known users. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In 7 studies, anonymity (users could share and receive information anonymously) was listed as a facilitating factor to engage and encourage disclosure of information.

    “Overall, 7 studies listed anonymity, meaning that users could share and receive information anonymously, as a facilitating factor to engage and encourage disclosure of information [41,88,129,137,141,148,232].”

    From Barriers to and facilitators of user engagement with digital mental health interventions: Systematic review (2021) · cites this paper as [137]

    The Discussion section, “Positives and Negatives of Digital Mental Health in the Workplace” (page unavailable), says anonymity helped some participants access support without fear of stigma, supporting its role as an engagement facilitator. The paper does not establish that anonymity encouraged disclosure through sharing and receiving information anonymously; the Results section, “The Negatives of Digital Mental Health Interventions,” includes a participant who said anonymous use involved “no real sharing.” The count of seven studies belongs to the citing paper’s synthesis, not to this source alone. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Study participants who used a mental health intervention in the workplace said privacy was not possible, as colleagues could see what someone was doing at their desk and when they were interacting with the intervention.

    “Study participants who used a mental health intervention in the workplace [137] said privacy was not possible, as colleagues could see what someone was doing at their desk and when they were interacting with the intervention.”

    From Barriers to and facilitators of user engagement with digital mental health interventions: Systematic review (2021) · cites this paper as [137]

    In Results, under “The Negatives of Digital Mental Health Interventions” (page unavailable), a participant describes an open-plan desk where colleagues could see her computer screen, supporting the privacy concern. But the paper presents this as a difficulty for some participants, not as proof that privacy was impossible for everyone; its Results also describe participants who valued the intervention’s privacy. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • It may be difficult to successfully implement web-based interventions within an organization as employees prefer to separate health matters and their workplace.

    “It may also be difficult to successfully implement web-based interventions within an organization as employees prefer to separate health matters and their workplace [32].”

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: 2

  1. [37]Lehr D Geraedts A Persson Asplund R Khadjesari Z Heber E de Bloom J Ebert DD Angerer P Funk B Wiencke M Cacace M Fischer S Occupational e-Mental Health: Current Approaches and Promising Perspectives for Promoting Mental Health in Workers Healthy at Work 2016 Cham Springer
  2. [64]Humphreys K Marx B Lexington J O'Donohue WT Fisher JE Self Monitoring as a Treatment Vehicle General Principles and Empirically Supported Techniques of Cognitive Behaviour Therapy 2009 New Jersey Wiley & Sons 576 583

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Carolan, S., & de Visser, R. O.
Affiliations
University of Sussex (GB)
Corresponding author
Carolan, Stephany
Venue
JMIR Mental Health
Published
2018-01-19
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
e8
ISSN
2368-7959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2783482506
Cited by
121
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1
FWCI
9.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Mental Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Sussex Research Online (University of Sussex) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
digital mental health interventions, workplace mental health, employee engagement, barriers to engagement, occupational stress, depression, anxiety, e-coaching, open-plan offices, anonymity, work-life separation, intervention design, staff perspectives, time constraints, reminders, interactive content, workplace mental health support

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