MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220854739 · doi:10.2196/35668

Evaluating User Feedback for an Artificial Intelligence–Enabled, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy–Based Mental Health App (Wysa): Qualitative Thematic Analysis

2022· article· en· W4220854739 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Human Factors · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHelpfulnessMental healthUsabilityThematic analysisApplied psychologyPsychologyComputer scienceMultimediaWorld Wide WebMedical educationHuman–computer interactionQualitative researchSocial psychologyMedicinePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Digital mental health apps are rapidly becoming a common source of accessible support across the world, but their effectiveness is often influenced by limited helpfulness and engagement. OBJECTIVE: This study's primary objective was to analyze feedback content to understand users' experiences with engaging with a digital mental health app. As a secondary objective, an exploratory analysis captured the types of mental health app users. METHODS: This study utilized a user-led approach to understanding factors for engagement and helpfulness in digital mental health by analyzing feedback (n=7929) reported on Google Play Store about Wysa, a mental health app (1-year period). The analysis of keywords in the user feedback categorized and evaluated the reported user experience into the core domains of acceptability, usability, usefulness, and integration. The study also captured key deficits and strengths of the app and explored salient characteristics of the types of users who benefit from accessible digital mental health support. RESULTS: The analysis of user feedback found the app to be overwhelmingly positively reviewed (6700/7929, 84.50% 5-star rating). The themes of engaging exercises, interactive interface, and artificial intelligence (AI) conversational ability indicated the acceptability of the app, while the nonjudgmentality and ease of conversation highlighted its usability. The app's usefulness was portrayed by themes such as improvement in mental health, convenient access, and cognitive restructuring exercises. Themes of privacy and confidentiality underscored users' preference for the integrated aspects of the app. Further analysis revealed 4 predominant types of individuals who shared app feedback on the store. CONCLUSIONS: Users reported therapeutic elements of a comfortable, safe, and supportive environment through using the digital mental health app. Digital mental health apps may expand mental health access to those unable to access traditional forms of mental health support and treatments.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.136
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.447
GPT teacher head0.600
Teacher spread0.153 · 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