AI-Led Mental Health Support (Wysa) for Health Care Workers During COVID-19: Service Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The impact that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on health care workers' mental health, in particular, cannot be ignored. Not only did the pandemic exacerbate mental health challenges through elevated stress, anxiety, risk of infection, and social isolation, but regulations to minimize infection additionally hindered the conduct of traditional in-person mental health care. OBJECTIVE: This study explores the feasibility of using Wysa, an artificial intelligence-led mental health app, among health care workers. METHODS: A national tertiary health care cluster in Singapore piloted the use of Wysa among its own health care workers to support the management of their mental well-being during the pandemic (July 2020-June 2022). The adoption of this digital mental health intervention circumvented the limitations of in-person contact and enabled large-scale access to evidence-based care. Rates and patterns of user engagement were evaluated. RESULTS: Overall, the opportunity to use Wysa was well-received. Out of the 527 staff who were onboarded in the app, 80.1% (422/527) completed a minimum of 2 sessions. On average, users completed 10.9 sessions over 3.80 weeks. The interventions most used were for sleep and anxiety, with a strong repeat-use rate. In this sample, 46.2% (73/158) of health care workers reported symptoms of anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder Assessment-7 [GAD-7]), and 15.2% (24/158) were likely to have symptoms of depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-2 [PHQ-2]). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the present findings, Wysa appears to strongly engage those with none to moderate symptoms of anxiety. This evaluation demonstrates the viability of implementing Wysa as a standard practice among this sample of health care workers, which may support the use of similar digital interventions across other communities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".