ArticleJMIR pediatrics and parenting2025
Adapting Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Adolescents in Iraq via Mobile Apps: Qualitative Study of Usability and Outcomes.
Article in JMIR pediatrics and parenting, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Mental health challenges, including anxiety and depression, are increasingly common among adolescents. Mobile health (mHealth) apps offer a promising way to deliver accessible cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) interventions. However, research on the usability and effectiveness of apps explicitly tailored for adolescents is limited. Objective: This study aimed to explore the usability, engagement, and perceived effectiveness of a mobile CBT app designed for adolescents, focusing on user experiences and mental health outcomes. Methods: A qualitative study was conducted with 40 adolescents aged 13-19 years (mean age 15.8, SD 1.9 years; 18/40, 45% male; 22/40, 55% female) who engaged with a CBT app for 4 weeks. Mental health diagnoses included anxiety (20/40, 50%), depression (15/40, 38%), and both (5/40, 13%). Of these, 10 (25%) of the 40 participants had previous CBT experience. Feedback was gathered through focus groups and individual interviews, and thematic analysis identified key themes related to usability, engagement, and perceived effectiveness. Quantitative data on mood and anxiety scores were analyzed with paired t tests. Results: The mean usability score was 3.8 (SD 0.6), and the mean effectiveness score was 3.9 (SD 0.7). Older participants (aged 16-19 years) reported significantly higher usability (mean 4.1, SD 0.4) and effectiveness scores (mean 4.3, SD 0.5) compared to younger participants (aged 13-15 years) (P=.03). Females had higher usability (mean 4, SD 0.6) and effectiveness scores (mean 4.2, SD 0.7) than males (mean 3.6, SD 0.7, and mean 3.5, SD 0.8, respectively; P=.03). Participants with prior CBT experience had 2.8 times higher odds of reporting high usability scores (95% CI 1.6-5; P=.002) and 3.1 times higher odds of reporting high effectiveness scores (95% CI 1.7-5.6; P=.001). Usability challenges included complex navigation (20/40, 50%), interface design issues (12/40, 30%), and content overload (8/40, 20%). Factors positively influencing engagement were motivation driven by personal relevance (20/40, 50%) and gamification features (10/40, 25%), while lack of personalization (14/40, 35%) and external distractions (18/40, 45%) were significant barriers. Mood improvement (15/40, 38%) and learning new coping skills (12/40, 30%) were the most reported outcomes. Conclusions: The mobile CBT app shows potential for improving adolescent mental health, with initial improvements in mood and anxiety. Future app iterations should prioritize simplifying navigation, adding personalization features, and enhancing technical stability to support long-term engagement.
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.