ArticleBMC public health2026
Acceptability of an e-mental health self-help intervention aiming to improve psychological distress among persons experiencing unstable housing in France.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. 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
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPeople experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage are at high risk of having mental health needs. E-mental health tools could help address the mental health needs of this hard-to-reach population. The aim of our study was to explore the acceptability and appropriateness of a mobile-supported website adaptation of WHO’s stress management guide “Doing What Matters in Times of Stress” (DWM) among individuals experiencing unstable housing conditions, as well as among relevant health and social care sector professionals working with this population in Paris.
methods48 individuals (22 persons experiencing unstable housing conditions and 26 key informants including health care and social workers) participated in a two-phase qualitative study. Participants completed free listing individual interviews (FLI) developed for the study and aiming to investigate access to communication technologies as well as barriers and facilitators of use e-mental health tools, and focus groups (FG) examining barriers and facilitators of use of the DWM online intervention (DWM-OI). All FLIs and FGs were transcribed and content analysis was implemented.
resultsDWM-OI was considered a useful tool to help individuals deal with stress, both by individuals experiencing unstable housing conditions and by health care and social professionals. Identified barriers to use included: low literacy, lack of face-to-face interaction, and intermittent accessibility to a smartphone or to the Internet. Some participants experiencing unstable housing conditions requested assistance to use DWM-OI as they would not be entirely at ease with this technology.
conclusionOur data suggest that the DWM e-mental health intervention (DWM-OI) is probably well-accepted by persons experiencing unstable housing conditions and by healthcare and social workers in contact with this group. However, certain barriers need to be addressed to make this type of e-mental health tool widely accessible to individuals who experience socioeconomic disadvantage.
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.