Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36322110›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2022

User Engagement Within an Online Peer Support Community (Depression Connect) and Recovery-Related Changes in Empowerment: Longitudinal User Survey.

Dorien Smit, Janna N Vrijsen, Theo Broekman, Bart Groeneweg, Jan Spijker

Open access · goldAbstract 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 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Dorien SmitPro Persona Mental Health Care, Pro Persona Research, Depression Expertise Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0874-5413
Janna N VrijsenPro Persona Mental Health Care, Pro Persona Research, Depression Expertise Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7081-9893
Theo BroekmanBureau Bêta, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4182-819X
Bart GroenewegDutch Depression (Patient) Association, Amersfoort, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9892-4564
Jan SpijkerPro Persona Mental Health Care, Pro Persona Research, Depression Expertise Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1480-9647
Radboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe chronic nature of depression and limited availability of evidence-based treatments emphasize the need for complementary recovery-oriented services, such as peer support interventions (PSIs). Peer support is associated with positive effects on clinical and personal recovery from mental illness, but little is known about the processes of engagement that foster change, and studies targeting individuals with depression specifically are limited.

objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate whether the level of user engagement, assessed on several dimensions, in an online peer support community for individuals with depression promotes empowerment and the use of self-management strategies and reduces symptom severity and disability.

methodsIn a longitudinal survey conducted from June 2019 to September 2020, we analyzed the data of the users of Depression Connect (DC), an online peer support community hosted by the Dutch Patient Association for Depression and the Pro Persona Mental Health Care institute, on measures of empowerment, self-management, depression, and disability. Of the 301 respondents, 49 (16.3%) respondents completed the survey again after 3 months and 74 (24.6%) respondents, after 6 months. Analysis of 3 parameters (ie, total time spent on the platform, number of page views, and number of posts) derived from their data logs yielded 4 engagement profiles. Linear mixed models were fitted to determine whether the outcomes had significantly changed over time and differed for the various profiles.

resultsBaseline engagement with the online peer support community was "very low" (177/301, 58.8%) or "low" (87/301, 28.9%) for most of the participants, with few showing "medium" (30/301, 9.9%) or "high" engagement patterns (7/301, 2.3%), while user profiles did not differ in demographic and clinical characteristics. Empowerment, self-management, depressive symptoms, and disability improved over time, but none were associated with the intensity or nature of user engagement.

conclusionsWith most DC members showing very low to low engagement and only a few being identified as high-engaged users, it is likely that this flexibility in use frequency is what provides value to online PSI users. In other more formal supportive environments for depression, a certain level of engagement is predetermined either by their organizational or by their societal context; at DC, users can adapt the intensity and nature of their engagement to their current needs on their personal road to recovery. This study added to the current knowledge base on user engagement for PSIs because previous studies targeting depression with an online format focused on active users, precluding passive and flexible engagement. Future studies should explore the content and quality of the interactions in online PSIs to identify optimal user engagement as a function of current, self-reported clinical parameters and reasons to engage in the PSI.

Indexed as

depressionempowermentexperiential knowledgeinternet support grouplongitudinal user surveyonline peer support communityself-managementuser engagement

Identifiers

PMID36322110
PMCPMC9669893
OpenAlexW4294761146

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.