ArticlePLOS digital health2025
A mobile intervention to reduce anxiety among university students, faculty, and staff: Mixed methods study on users' experiences.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2025. 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.
- 360° Video-Based Virtual Reality for Preparing Medical Students for Body Donor Dissection: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR formative research · 2026Trial
- Randomized controlled trial of smartphone-based interpretation bias intervention for anxiety and depression.Journal of consulting and clinical psychology · 2026Trial
- From immersion to burnout: anxiety mechanisms and pathways to motivational exhaustion in gamified health education.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Digital EduHealth for the wellbeing of minority university students: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Examining State Affective and Cognitive Outcomes Following Brief Mobile Phone-Based Training Sessions to Reduce Anxious Interpretations.Cognitive therapy and research · 2025Article
- A mobile intervention to reduce anxiety among university students, faculty, and staff: Mixed methods study on users' experiences.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Anxiety is highly prevalent among college communities, with significant numbers of students, faculty, and staff experiencing severe anxiety symptoms. Digital mental health interventions (DMHIs), including Cognitive Bias Modification for Interpretation (CBM-I), offer promising solutions to enhance access to mental health care, yet there is a critical need to evaluate user experience and acceptability of DMHIs. CBM-I training targets cognitive biases in threat perception, aiming to increase cognitive flexibility by reducing rigid negative thought patterns and encouraging more benign interpretations of ambiguous situations. This study used questionnaire and interview data to gather feedback from users of a mobile application called "Hoos Think Calmly" (HTC), which offers brief CBM-I training doses in response to stressors commonly experienced by students, faculty, and staff at a large public university. Mixed methods were used for triangulation to enhance the validity of the findings. Qualitative data was collected through semi-structured interviews from a subset of participants (n = 22) and analyzed thematically using an inductive framework, revealing five main themes: Effectiveness of the Training Program; Feedback on Training Sessions; Barriers to Using the App; Use Patterns; and Suggestions for Improvement. Additionally, biweekly user experience questionnaires sent to all participants in the active treatment condition (n = 134) during the parent trial showed the most commonly endorsed response (by 43.30% of participants) was that the program was somewhat helpful in reducing or managing their anxiety or stress. There was overall agreement between the quantitative and qualitative findings, indicating that graduate students found it the most effective and relatable, with results being moderately positive but somewhat more mixed for undergraduate students and staff, and least positive for faculty. Findings point to clear avenues to enhance the relatability and acceptability of DMHIs across diverse demographics through increased customization and personalization, which may help guide development of future DMHIs.
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.