Quality evaluation of stress, anxiety and depression apps for COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
COVID-19 has caused increased stress, anxiety and depression with increased barriers to treatment. Mobile apps offer a potential solution, but there is no information on the quality of such apps recommended for COVID-19. This study aims to evaluate the quality of stress, anxiety and depression apps recommended for COVID-19.Methods
A search was conducted to identify relevant apps on the iOS and Android platforms. 44 apps were evaluated using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS), and the American Psychiatric Association's app evaluation model for data privacy and security.Results
Overall quality scores of iOS and Android apps were 3.69 ± 0.43 and 3.66 ± 0.47. Thirty percent had good/excellent overall scores. In general, the iOS and Android versions of the apps scored best for functionality (4.21 ± 0.48, 4.12 ± 0.53), followed by aesthetics (3.84 ± 0.50, 3.78 ± 0.56), information (3.39 ± 0.54, 3.40 ± 0.60), and engagement (3.31 ± 0.81, 3.34 ± 0.84). Over half (59%) shared personal information with third parties and 14% were compliant with data protection standards.Limitations
Only free apps available in Singapore were evaluated. Our results are time sensitive due to addition, removal, and update of apps in the app stores, thus our results should be extrapolated with caution to apps from other countries and paid apps.Conclusion
Apps that addressed all three conditions had the highest overall quality scores. The top ranked apps (Sanvello, Woebot, Happify, Youper, Bloom) were of good quality, but majority were of acceptable quality and had room for improvement. App developers are encouraged to use our findings to improve and develop better quality apps.
SUBMITTER: Li LSE
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8531275 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:AIM:To investigate anxiety, stress, and depression levels of physicians during the Covid-19 outbreak and explored associated factors in both clinical and general site. METHODS:An online survey is conducted to asses psychological responses of healthcare workers and related factors during Covid-19 outbreak. It is consisted of three subsections covering the following areas: 1) sociodemographic data 2) information on individuals` working condition 3) Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale-21 (DAS-21). RESULTS:Of all 442 participants, 286 (64.7%) had symptoms of depression, 224 (51.6%) anxiety, and 182 (41.2%) stress. Being female, young, and single, having less work experience, working in frontline were associated with higher scores, whereas having a child was associated with lower scores in each subscale. Factors found to be associated with higher DAS-21 total scores in frontline workers were as follows: increased weekly working hours, increased number of Covid-19 patients cared for, lower level of support from peers and supervisors, lower logistic support, and lower feelings of competence during Covid-19 related tasks. CONCLUSIONS:Our findings highlight the factors which need to be taken into consideration to protect the mental wellbeing of doctors while fighting with a disaster that has major impacts on society worldwide.
| S-EPMC7255248 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionSymptoms related to mental health disorders became the background of the COVID-19 pandemic, and psychologists had to adapt to the demands, while they themselves were exposed to the pandemic and its stressors.ObjectivesTo identify demographic and professional characteristics of Brazilian psychologists in different phases of pandemic and their reported care practices, concerns, and symptoms.MethodsThis was an observational study conducted online in four independent phases with no pairing among the samples (May/June 2020, n = 263; November/December 2020, n = 131; May/June 2021, n = 378; November/December 2021, n = 222). Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale was used. The validity and reliability of the data obtained with the DASS-21 were attested to by confirmatory factor analysis. Basic lexographic and similarity analysis were conducted to obtain textual information. Prevalence of variables was estimated and compared between phases using the z-test (α = 5%). Similarity analysis was performed to identify the psychologists' concerns.ResultsMost of participants were women and were self-employed or employed. There was rapid adjustment to remote work and more than 70% reported changes in their mental health since the onset of pandemic. One in four participants had a previous mental health disorder, and there was a high prevalence of symptoms such as anxiety, fear, and angst. The prevalence of professionals who reported not caring about their own mental health was significant. In 2020, one cluster (health) of concern was identified, while in 2021 there were three clusters (health, family, and COVID-19). The prevalence of depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms was high and did not change during the pandemic.ConclusionsPsychologists adapted to the demands of the population in the face of the pandemic. However, there was a high prevalence of mental health symptoms and a disregard for self-care among these professionals.
| S-EPMC9756808 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aims of this study were to examine the effectiveness of a range of smartphone apps for managing symptoms of anxiety and depression and to assess the utility of a single-case research design for enhancing the evidence base for this mode of treatment delivery. The study was serendipitously impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, which allowed for effectiveness to be additionally observed in the context of significant community distress. A pilot study was initially conducted using theSuperBetter app to evaluate the proposed methodology, which proved successful with the four finishing participants. In the main study, 39 participants commenced (27 females and 12 males,MAge = 34.04 years,SD = 12.20), with 29 finishing the intervention phase and completing post-intervention measures. At 6-month follow-up, a further three participants could not be contacted. This study used a digitally enhanced, multiple baseline across-individuals single-case research design. Participants were randomly assigned to the following apps:SuperBetter (n = 8),Smiling Mind (n = 7),MoodMission (n = 8),MindShift (n = 8), andDestressify (n = 8). Symptomatology and life functioning were measured at five different time points: pre-baseline/screening, baseline, intervention, 3-week post-intervention, and 6-month follow-up. Detailed individual perceptions and subjective ratings of the apps were also obtained from participants following the study's completion. Data were analyzed using visual inspection, time-series analysis, and methods of statistical and clinical significance. Positive results were observed for all apps. Overall, more favorable outcomes were achieved by younger participants, those concurrently undertaking psychotherapy and/or psychotropic medication, those with anxiety and mixed anxiety and depression rather than stand-alone depression, and those with a shorter history of mental illness. Outcomes were generally maintained at 6-month follow-up. It was concluded that a diverse range of evidence-based therapies offered via apps can be effective in managing mental health and improving life functioning even during times of significant global unrest and, like all psychotherapies, are influenced by client features. Additionally, this single-case research design is a low-cost/high value means of assessing the effectiveness of mental health apps. Clinical Trial Registration: The study is registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), which is a primary registry in the World Health Organization Registry Network, registration number ACTRN12619001302145p (http://www.ANZCTR.org.au/ACTRN12619001302145p.aspx).
| S-EPMC8771308 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic directly affects the psychological well-being of critical care nurses. Several studies had investigated the psychological impact of the pandemic on nurses caring for patients with COVID-19, but few were conducted to identify the predictors of this impact.Aims and objectivesThe objective of this study is to identify the predictors of critical care nurses' stress, anxiety, and depression in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.DesignA cross-sectional survey was conducted in five intensive care units in five hospitals in Alexandria, Egypt.MethodsAn online questionnaire was distributed. It included socio-demographic and work-related data and the depression, anxiety, and stress scale scores of the nurses under study. A multiple linear regression model was developed to identify the predictors of critical care nurses' stress, anxiety, and depression in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.ResultsTwo hundred (64%) of 308 nurses completed the electronic questionnaire. Significant predictors of stress included the number of infected colleagues (P < .001) and availability of hospital resources (P = .01). Significant predictors of anxiety were age, gender, satisfactory income (P < .001), years of experience, time spent caring for patients with COVID-19 (P = .04), continuous training, number of infected colleagues (P = .01), and availability of hospital resources (P = .02). Finally, significant predictors of depression included gender, history of physical problems (P = .04), educational attainment, availability of hospital resources, history of psychological problems (P < .001), and number of infected colleagues (P = .001).ConclusionThe hospital's lack of human and physical resources and the number of colleagues infected with COVID-19 were the strongest predictors of stress, anxiety, and depression among nurses.Relevance to clinical practiceIdentifying the predictors of stress, anxiety, and depression among nurses who care for patients with COVID-19 is a vital step in developing mental health promotion strategies to support nurses during this pandemic.
| S-EPMC8662302 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The spread of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to numerous negative consequences on the mental health of the population throughout the world. The main aim of our study was to compare the risk for depression, anxiety, and stress during the second wave of the pandemic in Slovenia. An additional goal was to analyze the association of depression, anxiety, and stress, with the most relevant subjective factors that define the quality of life. Furthermore, we aimed at determining whether health workers have a higher risk for depression following the course of the pandemic. The study was conducted on the general population, between July 2020 and January 2021 through an online survey. The data of 1,728 respondents in two samples of respondents (782 at baseline - first measurement point and 946 during the second measurement point) of the second wave were analyzed using zero-inflated negative binomial regression and Mann-Whitney U-test. The findings of this study show that the rise the second wave was associated with a higher risk for depression, anxiety and stress. The risk for all three was higher for younger participants. Women showed a higher risk for anxiety and stress. Finances, relationships, and housing dissatisfaction were relevant predictors for depression, anxiety and stress. Health workers in our sample showed a higher risk for stress, but not for depression or anxiety, than the general population. Our findings highlight the urgent need for coordinating and developing mental health services and tailored interventions to reduce the mental health burden, especially in the younger.
| S-EPMC8791306 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThis study evaluates depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms in pregnant women before and during COVID-19 pandemic and analyzes their risk factors.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional analyses included pregnant women with depression, anxiety, and stress levels evaluated both in the Novel Coronavirus-Pregnancy Cohort study (NCP) and the Healthy Baby Cohort study (HBC). NCP was conducted during COVID-19 pandemic, while HBC was performed before the pandemic. Multiple logistic regressions were employed to evaluate the associations between COVID-19 pandemic and other co-variables and maternal mental health.ResultsNCP and HBC studies respectively included 531 and 2352 participants. Depression rates differed significantly between the two studies (p < 0.05). The mild and moderate-to-severe depression rates in NCP study were 25.8% and 10.36%, respectively, and 19.94% and 0.55% in HBC study. The stress rate of participants was higher in HBC study (69.39%) than in NCP study (60.45%) (p < 0.05). COVID-19 pandemic was correlated with higher depression but lower stress risks (p < 0.05) in pregnant women, with OR and 95% CI as 1.68 (1.16, 2.44) and 0.42 (0.29, 0.61), respectively. Pregnant women with pre-pregnancy obesity and high educational levels might have lower risks for depression, anxiety, and stress than those with normal weight and low educational levels.ConclusionsDepression among pregnant women was impacted by the pandemic. Apart from COVID-19 pandemic impact, pre-pregnant weight status and educational level might also influence depression, anxiety and stress statuses in pregnant women.
| S-EPMC8314786 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMultiple survey studies have demonstrated a mental health (MH) burden of COVID-19 globally. However, few studies have examined relevant risk factors for pandemic-related MH issues.MethodsA link to an online survey was posted from April 8th - June 11th, 2020 which included questions regarding COVID-19 experience, perceived impact of the pandemic on life domains (e.g., social communication, finances), behavioural alterations (e.g., online activities, substance use), and MH treatment history. Current psychiatric symptom severity and impairment were evaluated using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and the Perceived Stress Scale.ResultsOverall, 632 individuals (82% female, mean age:42.04 ± 16.56) in Canada and the United States completed the survey. While few reported contracting COVID-19 (0.5%), the impact of the pandemic was evident, with a vast majority reporting anxiety around COVID-19 infecting loved ones (88%). Almost half (43%) reported previous MH treatment and 31% met criteria for GAD, 29% for MDD and 63% reported significantly high levels of stress. Female sex, younger age and past MH treatment emerged as significant predictors of these issues(p < .01). Age-related differences in the impact of COVID-19 on life domains, substance use, and online activity were also noted.ConclusionThe findings from the current sample add to the growing literature suggesting negative effects of COVID-19 on MH, while highlighting specific risk factors. Age may be an important factor in predicting MH during this pandemic.
| S-EPMC8548032 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives: This study aimed to measure depression, anxiety and stress (DAS) among undergraduate dental students during the COVID-19 pandemic, identify key contributing factors of stress and explore the association of emotional intelligence to DAS. Methods: A multi-centre, cross-sectional study was conducted across four universities in Malaysia. The study administered a questionnaire consisting of the validated Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS), Dental Environment Stress (DES), Emotional Intelligence Scale (EI) and 10 statements assessing COVID-19 specific potential stressor factors. Results: Participants included 791 students across four universities. Abnormal levels of DAS were identified in 60.6%, 66.8% and 42.6% of the study participants, respectively. "Pressure of performance," "Faculty administration" and "Self-efficacy belief" were the highest rated stressors. On-time graduation was the main COVID-19 specific stressor factor. EI was negatively correlated with DAS scores (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The levels of DAS during COVID-19 pandemic in this population is high. However, participants with higher EI presented with lower DAS suggesting that EI may be a form of coping resource and should be enhanced in this population.
| S-EPMC9947836 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and the social distancing protocols used to impede the spread of the virus may have severe mental health consequences. The purpose of this study was to investigate the network of components of pandemic-related negative psychological states (i.e., fear of infection, financial worries, loneliness) and symptoms of major depressive disorder (MDD) and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD).MethodsData from 10,061 Norwegian adults recruited through an online survey during a period of strict social distancing protocols were analyzed by cross-sectional network methods.ResultsOf the infection fears, fear of being infected, fear of dying from the coronavirus and fear of significant others dying from it had notable connections to the GAD symptoms anxiety and/or fear of awful events. The financial worry component worry about personal economy was connected to the MDD symptom sleep problems and to the GAD symptom generalized worry. Each of the loneliness components was connected to a specific MDD symptom. Depressed mood, low energy and worthlessness had the highest strength centrality among the MDD symptoms; generalized worry, uncontrollability of worry, and trouble relaxing among the GAD symptoms; fear of dying from the virus among the fear of infection components; and feeling isolated among the loneliness components.LimitationsFull random sampling was not conducted, although the sample turned out to be relatively representative of the Norwegian population.ConclusionsSome components of the pandemic-related distressing states of fear of infection, financial worry and loneliness seem to be associated with specific symptoms of MDD and GAD.
| S-EPMC8433602 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimPatients with chronic diseases are believed to be at increased risk of mental health conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to assess the incidence of psychological morbidity in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, explore for association with risk of severe COVID-19 and other factors, and establish patients' interest in psychological support.MethodsA survey including the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, General Anxiety Disorder-7, and Perceived Stress Scale tools for depression, anxiety, and stress was administered to IBD patients from a tertiary center in London, United Kingdom, in June 2020.ResultsTwo hundred seventy-four patients responded to the survey (57% response rate), with 271 (99%) completing it. Moderate-severe depression was observed in 61 (22.5%), while 49 (18%) had moderate-severe anxiety; 39 (14%) had both diagnoses. Mean (SD) stress score was 16.2 (7.4). There was no association between degree of severe COVID-19 risk and psychological morbidity. Flare symptoms and fatigue were associated with worse psychological morbidity, while accessibility of information regarding COVID-19 risk and reducing that risk was protective for depression (odds ratio [OR] 0.56 [0.33-0.94], P = 0.03), anxiety (OR 0.62 [0.4-0.96], P = 0.03), and stress (standardized β-coefficient -0.15 [-0.28 to -0.03], P = 0.02). Seventy-nine (30%) respondents were interested in receiving psychological support during the pandemic, while 200 (76%) expressed interest beyond the pandemic.ConclusionsAlthough depression, anxiety, and stress among IBD patients during the pandemic were common, their frequency was similar to pre-pandemic rates and recent general population levels. Ensuring easy access to personalized risk information with targeted psychological support may mitigate psychological burden as patients reintegrate into society and deal with future COVID-19 waves.
| S-EPMC8762622 | biostudies-literature