ArticleCurrent psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.)2024
Does Personalized Mean Popular? A Content Analysis of Suicide Prevention Smartphone Applications.
Article in Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.), 2024. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Smartphone applications (apps) have wide reach and can help users in real-time; however, it is unclear if suicide prevention apps include content and features that are likely to improve users' experiences, such as personalization and interactivity. It is also unknown if app characteristics that contribute to popularity are also related to user-rated quality. This content analysis evaluated the content, functions, popularity (i.e., downloads), and user-rated quality (i.e., star ratings) of publicly available suicide prevention apps. Methods: Apps were downloaded from May-July 2022 and independently rated by two researchers. Discrepancies were resolved via discussion or a third rater. The Mobile Application Rating Scale assessed app quality. Results: The 74 included apps were collectively downloaded roughly 2,349,710 times. Approximately 22% had dynamic, personalizable, and actionable safety plans (e.g., called supports during crisis). Of variables that were significant in univariate models, larger apps, with secure access, and with risk reduction information were downloaded more frequently. Apps that provided developer's contact information and were rated more favorably by the researchers were given more stars by users. Identifying alcohol as a suicide risk factor was significant in both univariate models, but neither multivariate model. No other variables related to downloads were also related to star ratings. Conclusions: Suicide prevention apps vary in tailoring and dynamic features, but unexpectedly such features are unrelated to user-rated quality and popularity. The features that attract users to download apps, like having secure access and harm reduction, do not also contribute to positive ratings.
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.