Developing a Process for the Analysis of User Journeys and the Prediction of Dropout in Digital Health Interventions: Machine Learning Approach (Preprint)
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: User dropout is a widespread concern in the delivery and evaluation of digital (ie, web and mobile apps) health interventions. Researchers have yet to fully realize the potential of the large amount of data generated by these technology-based programs. Of particular interest is the ability to predict who will drop out of an intervention. This may be possible through the analysis of user journey data—self-reported as well as system-generated data—produced by the path (or journey) an individual takes to navigate through a digital health intervention. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to provide a step-by-step process for the analysis of user journey data and eventually to predict dropout in the context of digital health interventions. The process is applied to data from an internet-based intervention for insomnia as a way to illustrate its use. The completion of the program is contingent upon completing 7 sequential cores, which include an initial tutorial core. Dropout is defined as not completing the seventh core. METHODS: Steps of user journey analysis, including data transformation, feature engineering, and statistical model analysis and evaluation, are presented. Dropouts were predicted based on data from 151 participants from a fully automated web-based program (Sleep Healthy Using the Internet) that delivers cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia. Logistic regression with L1 and L2 regularization, support vector machines, and boosted decision trees were used and evaluated based on their predictive performance. Relevant features from the data are reported that predict user dropout. RESULTS: Accuracy of predicting dropout (area under the curve [AUC] values) varied depending on the program core and the machine learning technique. After model evaluation, boosted decision trees achieved AUC values ranging between 0.6 and 0.9. Additional handcrafted features, including time to complete certain steps of the intervention, time to get out of bed, and days since the last interaction with the system, contributed to the prediction performance. CONCLUSIONS: The results support the feasibility and potential of analyzing user journey data to predict dropout. Theory-driven handcrafted features increased the prediction performance. The ability to predict dropout at an individual level could be used to enhance decision making for researchers and clinicians as well as inform dynamic intervention regimens.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Bremer et al. (2020) identified that time spent in earlier stages of the program, morning wake-up times (before 4:30 am or later than 6:45 am), time to get out of bed (less than 9 minutes or more than 66 minutes), greater wake after sleep onset, logging triggers for 18 days or more, receiving emails for 30 days or more, and no interaction with the treatment platform for over 67 days could predict
“Bremer et al. (2020) focused on the analysis of user journeys and identified that time spent in earlier stages of the program, morning wake-up times (either before 4:30 am or later than 6:45 am), time to get out of bed (less than 9 minutes or more than 66 minutes), a greater wake after sleep onset, logging triggers for 18 days or more, receiving emails for 30 days or more, and no interaction with”
From Examining the role of AI technology in online mental healthcare: opportunities, challenges, and implications, a mixed-methods review (2024) · cites this paper as [83]
The Results (Statistical Analysis and Model Validation) identify the listed timing, sleep, and platform-use features as predictors of dropout in this intervention. Two thresholds differ: the paper says triggers logged for *more than* 18 days and emails received for *more than* 30 days, not 18 or 30 days or more. It also describes the 4:30–6:45 AM measure as time of getting out of bed rather than waking up. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe studies reporting on the use of ML algorithms found significant success in outcome prediction and feature detection to support online therapy delivery.
“Additionally, the studies reporting on the use of ML algorithms found significant success in outcome prediction and feature detection to support online therapy delivery (6, 19, 28, 29, 31, 33, 83, 85, 86, 92–94).”
From Examining the role of AI technology in online mental healthcare: opportunities, challenges, and implications, a mixed-methods review (2024) · cites this paper as [83]
The Results (Statistical Analysis and Model Validation; page not provided) report dropout-prediction performance, and the Discussion (Principal Findings; page not provided) identifies features important to prediction. But the paper describes this as a feasibility demonstration requiring a larger data set, not established significant success or a demonstrated improvement in online therapy delivery. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe relevant studies highlighted the importance of analyzing the large datasets produced by online mental healthcare interventions and the efficiency and accuracy of AI algorithms, which in some cases were comparable to or better than human assessors.
“As such, the relevant studies highlighted the importance of analyzing the large datasets produced by online mental healthcare interventions and the efficiency and accuracy of AI algorithms which in some cases were comparable to or better than human assessors (6, 19, 28, 29, 31, 33, 83, 85, 86, 92–94).”
From Examining the role of AI technology in online mental healthcare: opportunities, challenges, and implications, a mixed-methods review (2024) · cites this paper as [83]
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn terms of allegiance bias, most included articles developed and studied their own AI tools instead of AI tools developed by other researchers.
“In terms of allegiance bias, because of the scarcity and novelty of AI-augmented interventions and other AI algorithms, most of the included articles developed and studied their own AI tools, instead of AI tools developed by other researchers (29, 33, 73, 74, 76, 79, 80, 82–87, 90).”
From Examining the role of AI technology in online mental healthcare: opportunities, challenges, and implications, a mixed-methods review (2024) · cites this paper as [83]
Eight studies reported ethnicity; in most studies between 31% and 91% of participants identified as White.
“Eight studies reported on the ethnicity of the participants (30, 32, 41, 74, 76, 77, 80, 83), and in most of the studies between 31% and 91% of the participants identified as White.”
From Examining the role of AI technology in online mental healthcare: opportunities, challenges, and implications, a mixed-methods review (2024) · cites this paper as [83]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 47 · Cited by 29
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- [27]Jaques N Rudovic O Taylor S Sano A Picard R Predicting Tomorrow’s Mood, Health, and Stress Level using Personalized Multitask Learning and Domain Adaptation Proceedings of Machine Learning Research 2017 66 17 33
- [28]Becker D Bremer V Funk B Asselbergs J Riper H Ruwaard J How to Predict Mood: Delving into Features of Smartphone-Based Data European Conference on Information Systems 2016 ECIS'16 September 1, 2016 San Diego, USA
- [39]Khurana U Nargesian F Samulowitz H Khalil E Turaga D Automating Feature Engineering NIPS workshop 2016 NIPS'16 5-10 December, 2016 Barcelona, Spain
- [50]Lundberg S Lee S A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions Neural Information Processing Systems 2017 NIPS'17 December 4-9, 2017 Long Beach, USA 4765 4774
- Authors
- Bremer, V., Chow, P. I., Funk, B., Thorndike, F. P., & Ritterband, L. M.
- Affiliations
- Leuphana University of Lüneburg (DE)
- University of Virginia (US)
- Corresponding author
- Bremer, Vincent
- Venue
- Journal of Medical Internet Research
- Publisher
- JMIR Publications Inc.
- Published
- 2020-01-09
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- e17738-e17738
- ISSN
- 1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC7657718
- OpenAlex
- W3097807896
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 47
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6
- FWCI
- 2.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Multilingual Matters (Channel View Publications) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH086758)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
- Keywords
- digital health interventions, online intervention, insomnia, cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia, handcrafted features, feature engineering, user engagement
- MeSH terms
- Machine Learning, Internet-Based Intervention, Adult, Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Young Adult, 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