Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42422583›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2026

Responsible data selection method for algorithmic personalization of health apps: a case study on promoting mental health.

Esra Cemre Su de Groot, Ujwal Gadiraju, Olya Kudina, Loes Keijsers, Manon H J Hillegers, Willem-Paul Brinkman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital 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.

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.

Esra Cemre Su de GrootWeb Information Systems, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands.
Ujwal GadirajuWeb Information Systems, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands.
Olya KudinaValues, Technology & Innovation, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands.
Loes KeijsersDepartment of Psychology, Education and Child Studies, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Manon H J HillegersDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry/Psychology Erasmus MC Sophia Children's Hospital, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Willem-Paul BrinkmanInteractive Intelligence, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Digital technologies are on the rise to promote health. To improve the engagement and effectiveness of these technologies, there is a growing interest in algorithmic personalization. However, the user input data for these algorithms (e.g., data from wearables or self-reported data) can come with ethical and regulatory implications. Despite a growing amount of theoretical work, there is no practical precedent on how to consider these implications in the development of personalization algorithms. Therefore, our work aims to tackle this challenge by proposing a stepwise method for Responsible Data Selection (ReDS) for algorithmic personalization of mHealth. The ReDs method acts from a duty of care and promotes an active search for ethically less risky data. We demonstrate the six-step method through a real-world use case on an mHealth app promoting adolescents' mental well-being, using a dataset of 1181 adolescents (5199 interactions) who received coping strategy challenges based on cognitive behavioral therapy. First, we identified the personalization objective in the case study (step 1). The objective was to personalize the type of challenge to promote adherence while diversifying the coping strategy types within the completed challenges. Next, we identified the emotional state of the adolescent and prior completion rates as promising input data (step 2). However, personal emotion data can be considered sensitive, personal, and private, implying ethical implications (step 3). As a potential alternative, tiredness data can be perceived as less sensitive to share and collect (step 4). Subsequently, we analyzed the utility of all data features (step 5) using evaluative simulations with reinforcement learning models. This revealed that solely using the completion rates of the previous day could already benefit the personalization objective and that adding emotion data or tiredness data could similarly further increase the performance of the personalization algorithm. When determining the utility-risk trade-off (step 6), we conclude that tiredness data can be used as an alternative for emotion data if risk mitigation strategies are deployed. Through this case study, we demonstrate the practical utility of the ReDS method. We hope that our work will inspire future developers of personalization algorithms to explicitly incorporate ethical considerations in the algorithm development process.

Indexed as

algorithmsethical risksmachine learningmHealthpersonalizationregulationsresponsible data selectiontrade-off

Identifiers

PMID42422583
PMCPMC13343351

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.