Cited by 97Digital Mental Health InterventionsUsability and User Interface DesignMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Active Involvement of End Users When Developing Web-Based Mental Health Interventions

Open access
de Beurs, Derek, van Bruinessen, Inge, Noordman, Janneke, Friele, Roland, van Dulmen, Sandra·2017·Frontiers in Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although many web-based mental health interventions are being released, the actual uptake by end users is limited. The marginal level of engagement of end users when developing these interventions is recognized as an important cause for uptake problems. In this paper, we offer our perceptive on how to improve user engagement. By doing so, we aim to stimulate a discourse on user involvement within the field of online mental health interventions. METHODS: We shortly describe three different methods (the expert-driven method, intervention mapping, and scrum) that were currently used to develop web-based health interventions. We will focus to what extent the end user was involved in the developmental phase, and what the additional challenges were. In the final paragraph, lessons learned are summarized, and recommendations provided. RESULTS: Every method seems to have its trade-off: if end users are highly involved, availability of end users and means become problematic. If end users are less actively involved, the product may be less appropriate for the end user. Other challenges to consider are the funding of the more active role of technological companies, and the time it takes to process the results of shorter development cycles. CONCLUSION: Thinking about user-centered design and carefully planning, the involvement of end users should become standard in the field of web-based (mental) health. When deciding on the level of user involvement, one should balance the need for input from users with the availability of resources such as time and funding.

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 · 10.3389/fpsyt.2017.00072

Cites

28 of 28 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?

  • The emphasis of the framework on user-centred design is an advantage and is broadly applicable to mHealth, given recent recognition of the benefits of end-user engagement and feedback during the mHealth lifecycle.

    “The emphasis of the framework on user-centred design is an advantage and is broadly applicable to mHealth, given recent recognition of the benefits of end-user engagement and feedback during the mHealth lifecycle [56, 57].”

    From A user-centred design framework for mHealth (2020) · cites this paper as [57]

  • One of the main challenges for digital interventions is involving and keeping users engaged over a longer time span.

    “One of the main challenges is involving and keeping users engaged in the intervention over a longer time span [31,32]”

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

3 of the 31 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [15]Preece J Sharp H Rogers Y Interaction Design-beyond Human-Computer Interaction. Chichester, West Sussex UK: John Wiley & Sons (2015).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
de Beurs, D., van Bruinessen, I., Noordman, J., Friele, R., & van Dulmen, S.
Affiliations
Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NL)
Venue
Frontiers in Psychiatry
Published
2017-05-03
Volume
8
Pages
72-72
ISSN
1664-0640 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2606327865
Cited by
97
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 4
FWCI
9.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research portal (Tilburg University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
user participation, end users, digital mental health interventions, user engagement, intervention uptake, user-centered design, intervention mapping, Scrum, lessons learned

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