MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412046972 · doi:10.2196/68950

Designing Digital Mental Health Interventions to Meet the Needs of Older Adolescents: Qualitative Interview and Group Discussion Study

2025· article· en· W4412046972 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rachel Kornfield, Sarah A Popowski, Emily Tack, Miguel Herrera, Theresa Nguyen, Ashley A. Knapp, David C. Mohr, Jonah Meyerhoff

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsPreprintPsychological interventionMental healthQualitative researchPsychologyGerontologyMedicinePsychotherapistPsychiatryComputer scienceSociologyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Anxiety and depression are common in adolescents, but adolescents are often uninterested in formal mental health treatments or are unable to access them. Digital interventions can be delivered at scale to bridge critical gaps in mental health care but must address the needs and preferences of adolescents. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to conduct qualitative research involving adolescents aged 18 years to inform both the design of digital mental health interventions for adolescents broadly and new features and refinements to incorporate in an automated SMS text messaging intervention, Small Steps SMS, that was originally designed for young adults. METHODS: We recruited non-treatment-engaged older adolescents who were aged 18 years, lived in the United States, and had experienced depression or anxiety. In total, 12 participants were recruited through social media advertising and online self-screeners hosted by Mental Health America, a mental health advocacy organization. For 24 days, participants answered researcher prompts and engaged with one another in an asynchronous online discussion group, with a new discussion prompt released every 3 days. In parallel, partway through the discussion group, participants received interactive messages from Small Steps SMS, an automated SMS text messaging intervention that delivers daily dialogues supporting mental health self-management. Questions in the discussion group pertained to mental health challenges, help-seeking attitudes, perceptions of Small Steps SMS, and ways the program and other digital mental health interventions could meet the needs of older adolescents. A subset of participants (n=4, 33%) also completed interviews to elaborate on their responses. Thematic analysis was applied to transcripts of the discussion group and interviews to characterize user needs and design priorities when making Small Steps SMS and similar interventions available to adolescents. RESULTS: Participants reported factors that contributed to their experience of mental health symptoms, including the transition from adolescence to adulthood, fears that the world is unstable and their futures are uncertain, and ineffective use of social media to cope with symptoms. Participants were proud of their generation's mental health acceptance but also observed a generational divide in mental health stigma and literacy that could impede seeking help from parents and other adults. Participants appreciated that Small Steps SMS allowed them to pursue mental health self-management conveniently and independently. They suggested that the program and similar interventions address adolescent-specific challenges and facilitate intergenerational communication about mental health. They also recommended possible ways to increase engagement through peer-to-peer communication, gamification, and greater explanation of self-management strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Major life transitions affected adolescent participants' mental health needs and preferences for digital mental health tools. While interactive automated messaging programs have the potential to support self-management in this population, program content and features should be adapted to adolescents' needs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.569
Teacher spread0.418 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicDigital Mental Health Interventions→French-language works237,207→