Co-Designing a Mobile App to Improve Mental Health and Well-Being: Focus Group Study (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recent advances in mobile technology have created opportunities to develop mobile apps to aid and assist people in achieving various health and wellness goals. Mental health apps hold significant potential to assist people affected by various mental health issues at any time they may need it, considering the ubiquitous nature of mobile phones. However, there is a need for research to explore and understand end users’ perceptions, needs, and concerns with respect to such technologies. OBJECTIVE The aim of this paper is to explore the opinions, perceptions, preferences, and experiences of people who have experienced some form of mental health issues based on self-diagnosis to inform the design of a next-generation mental health app that would be substantially more engaging and effective than the currently available apps to improve mental health and well-being. METHODS We conducted six focus group sessions with people who had experienced mental health issues based on self-diagnosis (average age 26.7 years, SD 23.63; 16/32, 50% male; 16/32, 50% female). We asked participants about their experiences with mental health issues and their viewpoints regarding two existing mental health apps (the Happify app and the Self-Help Anxiety Management app). Finally, participants were engaged in a design session where they each sketched a design for their ideal mental health and well-being mobile app. RESULTS Our findings revealed that participants used strategies to deal with their mental health issues: doing something to distract themselves from their current negative mood, using relaxation exercises and methods to relieve symptoms, interacting with others to share their issues, looking for an external source to solve their problems, and motivating themselves by repeating motivational sentences to support themselves or by following inspirational people. Moreover, regarding the design of mental health apps, participants identified that general design characteristics; personalization of the app, including tracking and feedback, live support, and social community; and providing motivational content and relaxation exercises are the most important features that users want in a mental health app. In contrast, games, relaxation audio, the Google map function, personal assistance to provide suggestions, goal setting, and privacy preservation were surprisingly the least requested features. CONCLUSIONS Understanding end users’ needs and concerns about mental health apps will inform the future design of mental health apps that are useful to and used by many people.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".