ArticleJMIR human factors2025
The Safety of Digital Mental Health Interventions: Findings and Recommendations From a Qualitative Study Exploring Users' Experiences, Concerns, and Suggestions.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Co-Designing a Family e-Hub: A Systemic, Relational, Digital Mental Health Resource.Journal of marital and family therapy · 2026Article
- Leveraging expectation effects to improve outcomes in the context of digital mental health interventions.Internet interventions · 2026Review
- Barriers, Facilitators, Attitudes, and Preferences Toward Digital Mental Health Interventions Among Patients with Severe Mental Illness and Their Caregivers: A Qualitative Exploration from a Low- and Middle-income Setting.Indian journal of psychological medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Co-Design of a Depression Self-Management Tool for Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Survivors: Rapid Qualitative Analysis of Interview Feedback on a Prototype.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Needs and Preferences of Swedish Young Adults for a Digital App Promoting Mental Health Literacy, Occupational Balance, and Peer Support: Qualitative Interview Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe literature around the safety of digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) is growing. However, the user/patient perspective is still absent from it. Understanding the user/patient perspective can ensure that professionals address issues that are significant to users/patients and help direct future research in the field.
objectiveThis qualitative study aims to explore DMHI users' experiences, views, concerns, and suggestions regarding the safety of DMHIs.
methodsWe included individuals aged 18 years old or older, having experience in using a DMHI, and can speak and understand English without the need for a translator. Fifteen individual interviews were conducted. Deductive thematic analysis was used to analyze the data.
resultsThe analysis of the interview transcripts yielded 3 main themes: Nonresponse: A Concern, a Risk, and How Users Mitigate It, Symptom Deterioration and Its Management, and Concerns Around Data Privacy and How to Mitigate Them.
conclusionsThe results of this study led to 7 recommendations on how the safety of DMHIs can be improved: provide "easy access" versions of key information, use "approved by..." badges, anticipate and support deterioration, provide real-time feedback, acknowledge the lack of personalization, responsibly manage access, and provide genuine crisis support. These recommendations arose from users' experiences and suggestions. If implemented, these recommendations can improve the safety of DMHIs and enhance users' experience.
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.