ArticleJMIR formative research2025
Digital Mental Health Coaching in Clinically Diverse Populations: Controlled Engagement and Outcomes Study.
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.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Digital coaching programs, offering virtually delivered mental health care by coaches and companion apps, are an increasingly popular care model designed to increase accessibility and reduce strain on traditional mental health care systems. Initial studies suggest these programs can produce a range of positive mental health outcomes; however, methodological limitations and a focus on homogeneous, subclinical populations have constrained conclusions about their effectiveness, especially in diverse and clinically severe samples. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of an evidence-based digital mental health coaching program in a clinically and demographically diverse sample. The study compared engagement with app-based content and changes in depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms, over the course of 1 month, among users who received coaching versus those who used the app alone (controls). Methods: Program users (N=64) were categorized as coaching users (attending at least 1 session) or controls (app-only users). Depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms were assessed using the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21 at baseline and after 30 days. Engagement with app content was also measured. Between-group differences were analyzed using t tests and mixed multivariate analysis of covariance models, with follow-up sensitivity analysis of covariance analyses (controlling for age). Results: Participants were diverse in terms of demographics and clinical severity, with half reporting severe to extremely severe depression and nearly half reporting severe to extremely severe anxiety or stress at baseline. A repeated-measures multivariate analysis of covariance revealed a significant group-by-time interaction (P=.02), indicating greater symptom reduction among coaching users, primarily driven by changes in anxiety and stress. Follow-up analyses of covariance exploring symptom-specific patterns, excluding participants with subclinical baseline symptoms, yielded significant group-by-time interactions across depression (P=.04), anxiety (P=.003), and stress (P=.03). Engagement with app-based content did not significantly differ between the groups (P=.20), suggesting coaching's effectiveness was not contingent on differential app usage. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that digital mental health coaching can significantly improve clinical outcomes, even in diverse and clinically severe populations. These findings challenge the notion that coaching is only effective for subclinical or high-functioning individuals and highlight its potential to extend the reach of mental health care to underserved communities.
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.