Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29659857›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2018

Evaluation of a recommender app for apps for the treatment of depression and anxiety: an analysis of longitudinal user engagement.

Ken Cheung, Wodan Ling, Chris J Karr, Kenneth Weingardt, Stephen M Schueller, David C Mohr

Open access · bronzeAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Health Recommender Systems: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Monotone response surface of multi-factor condition: estimation and Bayes classifiers.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B, Statistical methodology · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. What Works Best to Engage Participants in Mobile App Interventions and e-Health: A Scoping Review.Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ken CheungDepartment of Biostatistics, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, NY, USA.
Wodan LingDepartment of Biostatistics, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, NY, USA.
Chris J KarrAudacious software, Chicago, IL, USA.
Kenneth WeingardtCenter for Behavioral Intervention Technologies (CBITs), Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA.
Stephen M SchuellerCenter for Behavioral Intervention Technologies (CBITs), Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA.
David C MohrCenter for Behavioral Intervention Technologies (CBITs), Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA.
Behavioral Tech · USColumbia University · USNorthwestern Medicine · US

Funding

Artificial Intelligence in a Mobile Intervention for Depression (AIM)R01MH100482 · NIMH · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI MOHR, DAVID CURTIS · 2013 to 2017
$3.1M
Novel Methods for Evaluation and Implementation of Behavioral Intervention Technologies for DepressionR01MH109496 · NIMH · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI CHEUNG, KEN, MOHR, DAVID CURTIS · 2016 to 2019
$1.6M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH100482NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH109496
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: While depression and anxiety are common mental health issues, only a small segment of the population has access to standard one-on-one treatment. The use of smartphone apps can fill this gap. An app recommender system may help improve user engagement of these apps and eventually symptoms. Methods: IntelliCare was a suite of apps for depression and anxiety, with a Hub app that provided app recommendations aiming to increase user engagement. This study captured the records of 8057 users of 12 apps. We measured overall engagement and app-specific usage longitudinally by the number of weekly app sessions ("loyalty") and the number of days with app usage ("regularity") over 16 weeks. Hub and non-Hub users were compared using zero-inflated Poisson regression for loyalty, linear regression for regularity, and Cox regression for engagement duration. Adjusted analyses were performed in 4561 users for whom we had baseline characteristics. Impact of Hub recommendations was assessed using the same approach. Results: When compared to non-Hub users in adjusted analyses, Hub users had a lower risk of discontinuing IntelliCare (hazard ratio = 0.67, 95% CI, 0.62-0.71), higher loyalty (2- to 5-fold), and higher regularity (0.1-0.4 day/week greater). Among Hub users, Hub recommendations increased app-specific loyalty and regularity in all 12 apps. Discussion/Conclusion: Centralized app recommendations increase overall user engagement of the apps, as well as app-specific usage. Further studies relating app usage to symptoms can validate that such a recommender improves clinical benefits and does so at scale.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsTelemedicineAdultAnxiety DisordersDepressive DisorderFemaleHumansMaleRegression Analysis

Identifiers

PMID29659857
PMCPMC6077782
OpenAlexW2795629330

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.