Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36256835›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2022

Understanding Mental Health Apps for Youth: Focus Group Study With Latinx Youth.

Elena Agapie, Katherine Chang, Sneha Patrachari, Martha Neary, Stephen M Schueller

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. MilitaryAdvances in neurodevelopmental disorders · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Mobile Apps for Children's Health and Wellbeing: Design Features and Future Opportunities.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2023
    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.

Elena AgapieDepartment of Informatics, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8292-9232
Katherine ChangDepartment of Psychological Science, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7372-8973
Sneha PatrachariDepartment of Informatics, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2944-533X
Martha NearyDepartment of Psychological Science, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1253-3459
Stephen M SchuellerDepartment of Informatics, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1003-0399

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn increasing number of mental health apps (MHapps) are being developed for youth. In addition, youth are high users of both technologies and MHapps. However, little is known about their perspectives on MHapps. MHapps might be particularly well suited to reach the youth underserved by traditional mental health resources, and incorporating their perspectives is especially critical to ensure such tools are useful to them.

objectiveThe goal of this study was to develop and pilot a process for eliciting youth perspectives on MHapps in a structured and collaborative way. We also sought to generate learnings on the perspectives of Latinx youth on MHapps and their use in ways that might facilitate discovery, activation, or engagement in MHapps, especially in Latinx populations.

methodsWe created a series of focus groups consisting of 5 sessions. The groups introduced different categories of MHapps (cognitive behavioral therapy apps, mindfulness apps, and miscellaneous apps). Within each category, we selected 4 MHapps that participants chose to use for a week and provided feedback through both between-session and in-session activities. We recruited 5 youths ranging in age from 15 to 21 (mean 18, SD 2.2) years. All the participants identified as Hispanic or Latinx. After completing all 5 focus groups, the participants completed a brief questionnaire to gather their impressions of the apps they had used.

resultsOur focus group methodology collected detailed and diverse information about youth perspectives on MHapps. However, we did identify some aspects of our methods that were less successful at engaging the youth, such as our between-session activities. The Latinx youth in our study wanted apps that were accessible, relatable, youth centric, and simple and could be integrated with their offline lives. We also found that the mindfulness apps were viewed most favorably but that the miscellaneous and cognitive behavioral therapy apps were viewed as more impactful.

conclusionsEliciting youth feedback on MHapps is critical if these apps are going to serve a role in supporting their mental health and well-being. We refined a process for collecting feedback from the youth and identified factors that were important to a set of Latinx youth. Future work could be broader, that is, recruit larger samples of more diverse youth, or deeper, that is, collect more information from each youth around interests, needs, barriers, or facilitators or better understand the various impacts of MHapps by using qualitative and quantitative measures. Nevertheless, this study advances the formative understanding of how the youth, particularly Latinx youth, might be viewing these tools.

Indexed as

CBTchildcognitive behavioral therapydigital health toolfocus grouphealth apphuman-centered designLatinoLatinxmental healthmental health appsmHealthmindfulnessmobile healthmobile phoneperspectivequalitativeteenageryouth

Identifiers

PMID36256835
PMCPMC9627467

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.