Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35353045›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2022

The Perceived Benefits of Digital Interventions for Behavioral Health: Qualitative Interview Study.

Gabriela Marcu, Steven J Ondersma, Allison N Spiller, Brianna M Broderick, Reema Kadri, Lorraine R Buis

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Digital versus nondigital behavioral interventions on cardiovascular risk reduction: systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2025
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Gabriela MarcuSchool of Information, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7150-5784
Steven J OndersmaDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology, & Reproductive Biology and the Division of Public Health, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1134-7723
Allison N SpillerSchool of Information, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5640-1821
Brianna M BroderickSchool of Information, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9604-0880
Reema KadriDepartment of Family Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0935-3761
Lorraine R BuisSchool of Information, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5855-9972
University of Michigan · USMichigan State University · US

Funding

Accelerating collaborative, cumulative, and open intervention science with an e-intervention authoring platformU24EB028990 · NIBIB · WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY · PI ONDERSMA, STEVEN J. · 2019 to 2023
$1.4M
NIBIB NIH HHS U24 EB028990
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital interventions have gained momentum in terms of behavioral health. However, owing to lacking standard approaches or tools for creating digital behavioral interventions, clinical researchers follow widely varying conceptions of how best to go about digital intervention development. Researchers also face significant cost-, time-, and expertise-related challenges in digital intervention development. Improving the availability of tools and guidance for researchers will require a thorough understanding of the motivations and needs of researchers seeking to create digital interventions.

objectiveThis study aims to understand the perceptions of behavioral researchers toward digital interventions, and inform the use of these interventions, by documenting the reasons why researchers are increasingly focusing their efforts on digital interventions and their perspectives on the perceived benefits that digital approaches can provide for researchers and intervention recipients.

methodsWe conducted semistructured qualitative interviews with 18 researchers who had experience designing digital behavioral interventions or running studies with them. A convenience sample of interviewees was recruited from among users of the Computerized Intervention Authoring System platform, a web-based tool that facilitates the process of creating and deploying digital interventions in behavioral research. Interviews were conducted over teleconference between February and April 2020. Recordings from the interviews were transcribed and thematically analyzed by multiple coders.

resultsInterviews were completed with 18 individuals and lasted between 24 and 65 (mean 46.9, SD 11.3) minutes. Interviewees were predominantly female (17/18, 94%) and represented different job roles, ranging from researcher to project or study staff. Four major themes came out of the interviews concerning the benefits of digital interventions for behavioral health: convenience and flexibility for interventionists and recipients, support for implementing evidence-based interventions with fidelity, scaling and improving access to interventions, and getting a foot in the door despite stigma and disenfranchisement.

conclusionsInterviewees described a number of important potential benefits of digital interventions, particularly with respect to scientific rigor, scalability, and overcoming barriers to reaching more people. There are complex considerations with regard to translating behavior change strategies into digital forms of delivery, and interventionists make individual, sometimes unexpected, choices with minimal evidence of their relative effectiveness. Future research should investigate how behavioral researchers can be supported in making these choices toward usability, ease of access, and approachability of digital interventions. Our study underscores the need for authoring platforms that can facilitate the process of creating and deploying digital interventions to reach their full potential for interventionists and recipients alike.

Indexed as

PsychiatryTelecommunicationsFemaleHumansQualitative ResearchResearch Designbrief interventionscomputer-assisted/methodscomputersdiagnosisimplementationmobile appsmobile phonemotivational interviewingqualitativescreeningsurveys and questionnairestherapy

Identifiers

PMID35353045
PMCPMC9008533
OpenAlexW4200132302

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.