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
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".