MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record 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 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ye Sheng Phang, Creighton Heaukulani, Wijaya Martanto, Robert Morris, Mian Mian Tong, Roger Ho

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Human Factors · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUsabilityAnxietyMental healthMedicineCoping (psychology)Clinical psychologyDepression (economics)PsychiatryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from 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.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.367 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Human FactorsSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207