MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4320073416 · doi:10.2196/42167

Perceptions of a Digital Mental Health Platform Among Participants With Depressive Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, and Other Clinically Diagnosed Mental Disorders in Singapore: Usability and Acceptability Study

2023· article· en· W4320073416 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ye Sheng Phang, Creighton Heaukulani, Wijaya Martanto, Robert Morris, Mian Mian Tong, Roger Ho

Notice bibliographique

RevueJMIR Human Factors · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiqueDigital Mental Health Interventions
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésUsabilityAnxietyMental healthMedicineCoping (psychology)Clinical psychologyDepression (economics)PsychiatryPsychology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The website mindline.sg is a stress management and coping website that can be accessed anonymously in Singapore for free. Although designed to serve individuals who are well or have mild depression and anxiety symptoms, mindline.sg may potentially be used by clinicians as an adjunct therapeutic aid for patients with clinically diagnosed mental disorders. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine the perceived usability, acceptability, and usefulness of mindline.sg among individuals with diagnosed mental disorders in a clinical setting. METHODS: A cross-sectional study with 173 participants was conducted in the waiting room of a psychiatrist's office at the National University Hospital in Singapore. Participants waiting for an appointment were given 30 minutes and a simple set of instructions to use three features of mindline.sg. They subsequently answered a set of web-based survey questions via their smartphones, including a 16-item subset of the Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire (PSSUQ) for usability measurement and 5 questions designed to understand the perceived usefulness and acceptability of mindline.sg. Multiple linear regression is used to determine the associated demographic factors with overall PSSUQ score. A chi-square test is performed to investigate associations of psychiatric condition with users' responses on acceptability and perceived usefulness of mindline.sg. For this study, P<.05 is considered significant. RESULTS: We observed that the overall (mean 2.86, SD 1.46), system usefulness (mean 2.74, SD 1.46), and information quality (mean 2.98, SD 1.33) subscores of the PSSUQ survey are within a 99% CI of a literature-derived norm, which all have the interpretation of having high perceived usability. However, interface quality (mean 2.98, SD 1.33) scored lower than the literature-derived norm, although it is still better than the neutral score of 4. We find participants with lower than a General Certificate of Education O-Level or N-Level education tend to give a lower usability score as compared to others (β=.49; P=.02). Participants who have not been hospitalized previously due to their condition are also more likely to give a lower PSSUQ score as compared to individuals who have been hospitalized (β=.18; P=.03). The platform mindline.sg is also deemed to be generally useful and acceptable with all the survey questions receiving more than a 60% positive response. We found no association between the type(s) of self-reported psychiatric disorder(s) and the perceived usefulness and acceptability of mindline.sg. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that mindline.sg is generally perceived as usable and acceptable by individuals with a diagnosed mental disorder in Singapore. The study suggests improving usability among individuals with lower education levels. Particularly promising is the finding that previously hospitalized individuals have significantly higher perceived usability and satisfaction of the website, suggesting potential impact could be found among a moderately to severely at-risk clinical population. The effectiveness of mindline.sg as an adjunct therapy for individuals with diagnosed mental disorders should therefore be explored in future studies.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,036
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,060
Tête enseignante GPT0,428
Écart entre enseignants0,367 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations6
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJMIR Human FactorsMême sujetDigital Mental Health InterventionsTravaux en français237 207