Dataset Information

Assessing the usability and user engagement of Thought Spot - A digital mental health help-seeking solution for transition-aged youth.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To evaluate the perceived usability of and user engagement with a digital platform (Thought Spot) designed to enhance mental health and wellness help-seeking among transition-aged youth (TAY; 17-29-years old).

Materials and methods

Survey responses and usage patterns were collected as part of a randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of Thought Spot. Participants given Thought Spot completed an adapted Usefulness, Satisfaction, and Ease of Use (USE) Questionnaire to measure perceived usability of the platform. User engagement patterns on Thought Spot were examined using analytics data collected throughout the study (March 2018-June 2019).

Results

A total of 131 transition-aged participants completed the USE questionnaire and logged on to Thought Spot at least once. Ease of learning scored higher than ease of use, usefulness and satisfaction. Participants identified numerous strengths and challenges related to usability, visual appeal, functionality and usefulness of the content. In terms of user engagement, most participants stopped using the platform after 3 weeks. Participants searched and were interested in a variety of resources, including mental health, counselling and social services.

Discussion

Participants reported mixed experiences while using Thought Spot and exhibited low levels of long-term user engagement. User satisfaction, the willingness to recommend Thought Spot to others, and the willingness for future use appeared to be influenced by content relevance, ease of learning, available features, and other contextual factors. Analysis of the types of resources viewed and searches conducted by TAY end-users provided insight into their behaviour and needs.

Conclusion

Users had mixed perceptions about the usability of Thought Spot, which may have contributed to the high attrition rate. User satisfaction and engagement appears to be influenced by content relevance, ease of learning, and the types of features available. Further investigation to understand the contextual factors that affect TAYs' adoption and engagement with digital mental health tools is required.

SUBMITTER: Shi J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8079441 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere is growing interest in using mobile apps and online tools to support postsecondary student mental health, but most of these solutions have suboptimal user engagement in real-world settings. Poor engagement can limit long-term effectiveness and usefulness of these tools. Previous literature has proposed several theories that link factors such as low usability and poor user-centered design to app disengagement. However, few studies provide direct evidence showing what factors contribute to suboptimal user engagement in the context of mobile mental health apps for postsecondary students.ObjectiveThis study focuses on understanding postsecondary students' attitudes and behaviors when using Thought Spot, a co-designed mental health app and online platform, to understand factors related to engagement and user experience.MethodsStudents who were given access to Thought Spot for 6 months during a randomized trial of the intervention were invited to participate in one-on-one semistructured interviews. The interviews explored participants' overall experiences and perceptions of the app, along with factors that affected their usage of various features. All interviews were recorded, and template analysis was used to analyze transcripts.ResultsUser satisfaction was mixed among users of Thought Spot. The degree of engagement with the app appeared to be affected by factors that can be grouped into 5 themes: (1) Students valued detailed, inclusive, and relevant content; (2) Technical glitches and a lack of integration with other apps affected the overall user experience and satisfaction with the app; (3) Using the app to support peers or family can increase engagement; (4) Crowdsourced information from peers about mental health resources drove user engagement, but was difficult to obtain; and (5) Users often turned to the app when they had an immediate need for mental health information, rather than using it to track mental health information over time.ConclusionsContent, user experience, user-centeredness, and peer support are important determinants of user engagement with mobile mental health apps among postsecondary students. In this study, participants disengaged when the app did not meet their expectations on these determinants. Future studies on user engagement should further explore the effectiveness of different features and the relative importance of various criteria for high-quality apps. Further focus on these issues may inform the creation of interventions that increase student engagement and align with their mental health needs.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03412461; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03412461.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.2196/resprot.6446.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Mental health disorders are the most prevalent health issues among postsecondary students, yet few solutions to this emerging crisis exist. While mobile health technologies are touted as promising solutions for the unmet mental health needs of these students, the efficacy of these tools remains unclear. In response to these gaps, this study evaluates Thought Spot, a mobile and web app created through participatory design research. OBJECTIVE:The goal of the research is to examine the impact of Thought Spot on mental health and wellness help-seeking intentions, behaviors, attitudes, self-stigma, and self-efficacy among postsecondary students in Canada. METHODS:A 2-armed randomized controlled trial involving students from three postsecondary institutions was conducted. Students were eligible if they were aged 17 to 29 years, enrolled in full-time or part-time studies, functionally competent in English, and had access to a compatible digital device. The usual care group received a mental health services information pamphlet. The intervention group received the Thought Spot app on their digital device. Thought Spot is a standalone app that allows users to add, review, and search crowdsourced information about nearby mental health and wellness services. Users can also track their mood on the app. Outcomes were self-assessed through questionnaires collected at baseline and 3 and 6 months. The primary outcome was change in formal help-seeking intentions from baseline to 6 months, measured by the General Help-Seeking Questionnaire. A mixed-effects model was used to compare the impact of usual care and intervention on the primary outcome (formal help-seeking intentions). Secondary outcomes included changes in informal help-seeking intentions and help-seeking behaviors, help-seeking attitudes, self-stigma, and self-efficacy. RESULTS:A total of 481 students were randomized into two groups: 240 to usual care, and 241 to the intervention group. There were no significant differences in help-seeking intentions between the usual care and intervention groups over 6 months (F2,877=0.85; P=.43, f=0.04). Both groups demonstrated similar increases in formal help-seeking intentions at 3 and 6 months (F2,877=23.52; P<.001, f=0.21). Compared with males, females sought more help from formal resources (OR 1.86; 95% CI 1.22 to 2.83, P=.001). Females were less likely to seek help from informal sources than males (OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.73, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS:Prompting postsecondary students about mental health and help-seeking appears to increase help-seeking intentions. mHealth interventions may be as effective as information pamphlets in increasing formal help-seeking but may confer a small advantage in driving help-seeking from informal sources. Although there is enthusiasm, developers and health policy experts should exercise caution and thoroughly evaluate these types of digital tools. Future studies should explore the cost-effectiveness of digital interventions and develop strategies for improving their efficacy. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03412461; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03412461. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID):RR2-10.2196/resprot.6446.

Project description:BackgroundWhile many digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) have been found to be efficacious, patient engagement with DMHIs has increasingly emerged as a concern for implementation in real-world clinical settings. To address engagement, we must first understand what standard engagement levels are in the context of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and how these compare with other treatments.ObjectiveThis scoping review aims to examine the state of reporting on intervention engagement in RCTs of mobile app-based interventions intended to treat symptoms of depression. We sought to identify what engagement metrics are and are not routinely reported as well as what the metrics that are reported reflect about standard engagement levels.MethodsWe conducted a systematic search of 7 databases to identify studies meeting our eligibility criteria, namely, RCTs that evaluated use of a mobile app-based intervention in adults, for which depressive symptoms were a primary outcome of interest. We then extracted 2 kinds of information from each article: intervention details and indices of DMHI engagement. A 5-element framework of minimum necessary DMHI engagement reporting was derived by our team and guided our data extraction. This framework included (1) recommended app use as communicated to participants at enrollment and, when reported, app adherence criteria; (2) rate of intervention uptake among those assigned to the intervention; (3) level of app use metrics reported, specifically number of uses and time spent using the app; (4) duration of app use metrics (ie, weekly use patterns); and (5) number of intervention completers.ResultsDatabase searching yielded 2083 unique records. Of these, 22 studies were eligible for inclusion. Only 64% (14/22) of studies included in this review specified rate of intervention uptake. Level of use metrics was only reported in 59% (13/22) of the studies reviewed. Approximately one-quarter of the studies (5/22, 23%) reported duration of use metrics. Only half (11/22, 50%) of the studies reported the number of participants who completed the app-based components of the intervention as intended or other metrics related to completion. Findings in those studies reporting metrics related to intervention completion indicated that between 14.4% and 93.0% of participants randomized to a DMHI condition completed the intervention as intended or according to a specified adherence criteria.ConclusionsFindings suggest that engagement was underreported and widely varied. It was not uncommon to see completion rates at or below 50% (11/22) of those participants randomized to a treatment condition or to simply see completion rates not reported at all. This variability in reporting suggests a failure to establish sufficient reporting standards and limits the conclusions that can be drawn about level of engagement with DMHIs. Based on these findings, the 5-element framework applied in this review may be useful as a minimum necessary standard for DMHI engagement reporting.