Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32778200›Full record

ArticleBJPsych open2020

Beyond clicks and downloads: a call for a more comprehensive approach to measuring mobile-health app engagement.

Heather L O'Brien, Emma Morton, Andrea Kampen, Steven J Barnes, Erin E Michalak

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJPsych open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Heather L O'BrienSchool of Information, University of British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4780-2505
Emma MortonInstitute of Mental Health Marshall Fellow at the Department of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Canada.
Andrea KampenSchool of Information, University of British Columbia, Canada.
Steven J BarnesDepartment of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Canada.
Erin E MichalakDepartment of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Canada.
University of British Columbia · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Downloading a mobile health (m-health) app on your smartphone does not mean you will ever use it. Telling another person about an app does not mean you like it. Using an online intervention does not mean it has had an impact on your well-being. Yet we consistently rely on downloads, clicks, 'likes' and other usage and popularity metrics to measure m-health app engagement. Doing so misses the complexity of how people perceive and use m-health apps in everyday life to manage mental health conditions. This article questions commonly used behavioural metrics of engagement in mental health research and care, and proposes a more comprehensive approach to measuring in-app engagement.

Indexed as

Information technologiesmental healthmobile health applicationsusage datauser engagement

Identifiers

PMID32778200
PMCPMC7453800
OpenAlexW3048418686

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.