Journal of affective disorders · 2020
There is a non-evidence-based app for that: A systematic review and mixed methods analysis of depression- and anxiety-related apps that incorporate unrecognized techniques.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Baumel Amit, Torous John, Edan Stav, Kane John M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Recent studies have utilized available online data to examine the impact of depression- and anxiety-related apps that incorporate evidence-based techniques; however, the impact of apps incorporating non-evidence-based techniques is unknown. Understanding this impact is important in order to assess the potential benefits or harm from their use.
METHODS: We systematically reviewed apps incorporating relevant techniques aimed at depression- and anxiety-related conditions, found through Google Play search. We conducted quantitative and qualitative analyses of user reviews, and analyzed app usage utilizing an independent user panel.
RESULTS: Compared to apps incorporating evidence-based techniques (n = 14), user ratings of apps classified as non-evidence-based (n = 27) were lower (4.0 versus 4.5, p=.001, η2=0.24) and a smaller percentage of users found these apps to be beneficial for mental health (76.2% versus 100%, p=.003, η2=0.23). Users found apps incorporating non-evidence-based techniques to be mostly helpful in providing in-the-moment relief; however, some users described these apps as containing content that could be harmful for a person in such a mental state.
LIMITATIONS: The data do not enable the differentiation of user experiences based on user groups (e.g. according to the severity of symptoms), which should be examined in future studies.
CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that depression and anxiety apps incorporating non-evidence-based techniques are viewed less favorably and have more potential to cause harm. However, many users found them helpful mostly in providing in-the-moment relief. Examining user experiences with these apps is an important way to learn about unmet user needs and potential benefits or harm.
METHODS: We systematically reviewed apps incorporating relevant techniques aimed at depression- and anxiety-related conditions, found through Google Play search. We conducted quantitative and qualitative analyses of user reviews, and analyzed app usage utilizing an independent user panel.
RESULTS: Compared to apps incorporating evidence-based techniques (n = 14), user ratings of apps classified as non-evidence-based (n = 27) were lower (4.0 versus 4.5, p=.001, η2=0.24) and a smaller percentage of users found these apps to be beneficial for mental health (76.2% versus 100%, p=.003, η2=0.23). Users found apps incorporating non-evidence-based techniques to be mostly helpful in providing in-the-moment relief; however, some users described these apps as containing content that could be harmful for a person in such a mental state.
LIMITATIONS: The data do not enable the differentiation of user experiences based on user groups (e.g. according to the severity of symptoms), which should be examined in future studies.
CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that depression and anxiety apps incorporating non-evidence-based techniques are viewed less favorably and have more potential to cause harm. However, many users found them helpful mostly in providing in-the-moment relief. Examining user experiences with these apps is an important way to learn about unmet user needs and potential benefits or harm.