MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3160582809 · doi:10.2196/26852

Patients’ Experiences of Using a Self-help App for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: Qualitative Study

2021· article· en· W3160582809 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lisa Groenberg Riisager, Anne Bryde Christensen, Frederik Bernt Scharff, Ida‐Marie T. P. Arendt, Israa Ismail, Marianne Engelbrecht Lau, Stine Bjerrum Møeller

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPosttraumatic stressPsychologyClinical psychologyQualitative researchStress (linguistics)PsychotherapistSociologyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a common disorder that requires more treatment options. Mobile health (mHealth) app interventions are promising for patients with PTSD, as they can provide easily accessible support, strategies, and information. However, knowledge about mHealth interventions is sparse and primarily based on quantitative studies. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to qualitatively explore the experiences of patients with PTSD with regard to using an mHealth app as a stand-alone intervention before commencing psychotherapeutic treatment. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 14 participants 6 weeks after they received the app. The participants were all referred to PTSD treatment and were waiting to commence psychotherapeutic treatment. During this waiting time, the participants had no contact with the health staff. Interviews were transcribed and were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 3 themes were identified-the use of app, being a patient, and the overall evaluation of the app. The use of the app was described with the subtheme of habits, and the theme of being a patient included the subthemes of having negative experiences with the app and being a part of a research project. The use of the app encompassed how psychological factors and technical problems could interfere with the use of the app. The theme of being a patient depicted that the waiting time before starting treatment was long, and a subgroup of patients experienced feeling worse during this time, which they partly attributed to using the app. Several suggestions for change have been described in the overall evaluation of the app. CONCLUSIONS: The findings in this study revealed that emotional arousal influenced the use of the app and that it was difficult for participants to establish a habit of using the app, thus reflecting the importance of supporting habit formation when implementing an mHealth app in mental health care services. This study makes an important contribution to the field of mHealth research, as it revealed that some participants had negative experiences resulting from using the app, thus reflecting the potential harm of having an mHealth app without the support of a clinician. It is therefore recommended to use a blended care treatment or an approach in which mental health care professionals prescribe an mHealth app for relevant patients to avoid increased suicidal risk.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.181
GPT teacher head0.568
Teacher spread0.388 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicDigital Mental Health Interventions→French-language works237,207→