ArticleBMC psychiatry2024
Skill enactment and knowledge acquisition among community users of digital mental health interventions: qualitative study with thematic analysis.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
backgroundThe acquisition of knowledge and use of skills from digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) are considered important for effectiveness. However, our understanding of user experiences implementing skills learned from these interventions is limited, particularly outside of research trials. This qualitative study aimed to investigate how community users learn and apply knowledge and skills from DMHIs based on cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) in daily life. The study also examined factors influencing the selection and use of skills and explored perceived changes in mental health resulting from the intervention.
methodsThirteen adults aged 26 to 66 years (10 females) were recruited using social media advertising and participated in semi-structured interviews by telephone or videoconference. All participants were living in Australia and had used a digital CBT program within the past 3 months. Interviews lasted on average 45 min. Transcripts were analysed using theoretical thematic analysis.
resultsParticipants demonstrated high levels of program engagement. Findings were organised into three topics with six major themes. Participants reported that their chosen intervention reinforced existing knowledge and fostered new skills and insights (Topic 1, Theme 1: knowledge consolidation). Most described actively applying skills (Topic 1, Theme 2: active approach to skill enactment), although the extent of learning and range of skills enacted varied across participants. Influences on skill selection included the perceived relevance of intervention strategies to the user's needs and personal characteristics (Topic 2, Theme 1: relevance of intervention strategies), as well as the perceived or experienced effectiveness of those strategies (Topic 2, Theme 2: perceived and experienced benefit). Challenges to ongoing skill enactment included time scarcity, prioritisation difficulties, and lack of motivation (Topic 2, Theme 3: navigating time constraints and low motivation). Improvements in mental health were generally modest and attributed mainly to participants' proactive efforts (Topic 3, Theme 1: perceived changes).
conclusionsDMHIs may reinforce existing understanding of psychotherapeutic strategies, offer new knowledge, and encourage the application of skills in everyday life among community users who actively engage with these interventions. Future research should prioritise personalising DMHIs and investigating methods to optimise the acquisition, retention, and sustained application of knowledge and skills.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.