Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41640069›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2026

Young People's Satisfaction With and Perceived Impact of a Multichannel Mental Health Helpline During and After COVID-19 Pandemic: Mixed Methods Analysis of Cross-Sectional Survey Data.

Shyn Wei Phua, Anya Jan, Guanlin Zheng, Leslie Morrison Gutman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2026. 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

4 authors.

Shyn Wei PhuaFaculty of Brain Sciences, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, United Kingdom, +44 7679-2000.ORCID 0009-0005-2403-6141
Anya JanFaculty of Brain Sciences, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, United Kingdom, +44 7679-2000.ORCID 0009-0006-5322-0404
Guanlin ZhengFaculty of Brain Sciences, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, United Kingdom, +44 7679-2000.ORCID 0009-0006-4542-9590
Leslie Morrison GutmanFaculty of Brain Sciences, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, United Kingdom, +44 7679-2000.ORCID 0000-0003-0567-7347

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In the United Kingdom, there was an increased demand for young people's mental health helpline services during COVID-19 pandemic, when face-to-face services were often inaccessible. Despite this, there is scant research examining young people's experiences with these helplines during the pandemic and postpandemic periods. Objective: Using a cross-sectional survey, this mixed methods study aims to examine young people's (aged 16-25+ years) experiences with the multichannel helpline provided by The Mix (Mental Health Innovations), the United Kingdom's leading online mental health support service for young people during and after the pandemic. Methods: From February 2020 to October 2023, approximately 16,000 users aged 16-25+ years contacted The Mix's helpline. All users were sent an email by The Mix following helpline contact to answer their user survey. Of these, 796 participants aged 16-25+ years answered the survey, representing a response rate of 5%, with a survey completion rate of 65.3%. To address potential nonresponse bias and missing data concerns, a multiple imputation procedure using the Multiple Imputation by Chained Equations (MICE) package in R (R Core Team) provided a final imputed sample for both the pandemic (n=295) and postpandemic (n=501) periods. Open-ended survey responses from users were also explored. Of the 796 participants who responded to the survey, there were 1183 open-ended responses from 486 respondents. Of these, a total of 731 open-ended responses (approximately 60% of the total responses) were coded. The criteria for inclusion were applied by 2 independent coders. Excluded responses focused on single words (eg, "thanks"), irrelevant text, or duplicated entries, ensuring only responses containing substantive feedback were analyzed. Results: During the pandemic, young people who contacted the helpline reported greater satisfaction after the first lockdown and a stronger perceived impact on their well‑being after the first lockdown and during the second and third lockdowns, compared with those who contacted the helpline during the gradual easing period; phone users reported higher satisfaction than those using the contact form. Postpandemic, helpline users who identified as "other" in terms of their gender reported less satisfaction, while male users reported a greater impact on their well-being compared to female users. Qualitative analysis revealed how the participants felt supported by the helpline, such as "feeling heard" and "being empowered," and areas for improvement across service delivery, protocol, and technicalities. Conclusions: The findings highlight the important role that helplines play in supporting young people's mental health, particularly in crises like the pandemic. This study underscores the need for service improvements to ensure young people continue to feel supported by helplines, highlighting key areas for improvement in service delivery, protocols, and technical infrastructure. Future research should explore channel preferences and minority experiences, often underrepresented in helpline studies.

Indexed as

COVID-19HotlinesMental Health ServicesPatient SatisfactionAdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMental Health TeletherapyPandemicsSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited KingdomYoung Adultadolescentsevaluationhelplinehelp-seekinginternetmental healthonlinequalitativequantitativesurvey

Identifiers

PMID41640069
PMCPMC12872607

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.