Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40749729›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2025

Students' Perceptions of Learning Analytics for Mental Health Support: Qualitative Study.

Aglaia Freccero, Miriam Onwunle, Jordan Elliott, Nathalie Podder, Julia Purrinos De Oliveira, Lindsay H Dewa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Aglaia FrecceroDivision of Psychiatry, Department of Brain Sciences, Imperial College London, 2nd Floor Commonwealth Building, Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN, United Kingdom, 44 7551893250.ORCID 0009-0002-2072-9838
Miriam OnwunleSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0009-0006-6921-130X
Jordan Elliott *Division of Psychiatry, Department of Brain Sciences, Imperial College London, 2nd Floor Commonwealth Building, Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN, United Kingdom, 44 7551893250.ORCID 0009-0001-0665-4019
Nathalie Podder *Institute of Security Science & Technology, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0009-0007-3722-6168
Julia Purrinos De Oliveira *Department of Life Sciences, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0009-0004-7229-6709
Lindsay H DewaSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8359-8834

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Poor mental health among higher education students is a global public health concern. Learning analytics, which involves collecting and analyzing big data to support learning, could detect changes in behavior, learning patterns, as well as mental health and well-being. This could help inform mental health interventions in university settings. However, research has yet to explore students' perspectives on using learning analytics for mental health and well-being purposes. Objective: This study aimed to explore students' perspectives on using learning analytics to support students' mental health and well-being at university. Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted online using Microsoft Teams between June and July 2023. Participants were identified through university student unions, social media, and snowball sampling. In total, 3 university students aged 20-26 years joined our team and formed our student advisory group (SAG). They informed the design, analysis, and dissemination stages of the research cycle. Braun and Clarke's approach guided our thematic analysis. Data were triangulated by comparing codes from 2 transcripts across 2 independent researchers over a 2-hour online meeting. A coding framework was cocreated with the SAG to code the remaining transcripts and ensure data saturation. Themes were finalized and presented in a thematic map during a 2-hour meeting with the SAG and 2 researchers. Results: In total, 15 participants were interviewed. We identified three main themes: (1) potential of learning analytics for mental health and well-being innovation, (2) student involvement in decision-making regarding learning analytics, and (3) integration of learning analytics with existing support. Despite being initially unaware, students recognized the potential of using learning analytics as a monitoring and early intervention tool to support university students' mental health. However, students raised concerns regarding data reliability and identified several ethical issues, such as privacy and lack of transparency. They also expressed the need to be involved in decision-making regarding learning analytics design, practices, and policies. Overall, students welcomed the possible integration of learning analytics with the existing university support. Conclusions: This is the first qualitative study to explore students' perceptions of using learning analytics to support student mental health and well-being. Students' generally positive attitudes toward learning analytics suggest that this tool could be effectively integrated into the existing university support systems. Considering the ethical concerns raised by students, our findings suggest the need to bring the student voice into learning analytics development and implementation.

Indexed as

LearningMental HealthStudentsAdultFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleQualitative ResearchUniversitiesYoung Adultbig datadata mininge-learninghigher educationlearning analyticsmental healthwell-being

Identifiers

PMID40749729
PMCPMC12316473

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.