ArticleDigital health
What criteria are young people using to select mobile mental health applications? A nominal group study.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Skepticism and excitement when co-designing just-in-time mental health apps with minoritized youth.Internet interventions · 2026Article
- Perspectives on Accessing Mental Health Supports for Youth Living With Post-Traumatic Stress Symptoms After a Solid Organ Transplant.Pediatric transplantation · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the Clear Fear Smartphone App for Young People Experiencing Anxiety: Uncontrolled Pre- and Post-Follow-Up Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- "I'm Staring at the Screen All the Time": Technology Use and Mindfulness in Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes.Comprehensive child and adolescent nursing · 2024Article
- Assessing the Hands-on Usability of the Healthy Jeart App Specifically Tailored to Young Users.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The popularity of smartphone technology provides a unique opportunity to make mental health support widely accessible, especially among young people. Despite the promising results of some mobile mental health support applications, the overwhelming number of available applications (apps) on the market makes it difficult to make a choice that will be safe and effective. Currently, widely available tools are either developed by experts, without end user input or are solely based on usability rankings. Thus, it remains unclear what aspects of mental health apps are important for young people. The purpose of this study was to determine what criteria young adults use when they select mental health applications and what is the relative importance of these criteria to inform the development of a user-driven app-rating platform. Methods: We conducted 4 group sessions with 47 youth and young adults aged 15-25 in British Columbia, Canada using a modified nominal group technique. This method allows for establishing the relative importance of criteria in a structured group discussion. We recorded, transcribed and analysed the resulting data using qualitative content analysis and quantitative methods. Results: Criteria that are the most important to young adults when selecting mental health apps include accessibility, security and grounding in scientific evidence. We identified specific aspects of the discussed criteria which were ranked in the order of importance. Conclusion: Consulting end users about their priorities when evaluating mental health apps ensures that their values and priorities are incorporated into future app-rating platforms, alongside expert opinions. The present study also outlines the common contexts in which apps are used as well as their desirable features to inform mental health app development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.