Abigail Wexner Research Institute, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, United States.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020 Aug 4;8(8):e18392. doi: 10.2196/18392.
BACKGROUND: Many people use apps to help understand and manage their depression symptoms. App-administered questionnaires for the symptoms of depression, such as the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, are easy to score and implement in an app, but may not be accompanied by essential resources and access needed to provide proper support and avoid potential harm. OBJECTIVE: Our primary goal was to evaluate the differences in risks and helpfulness associated with using an app to self-diagnose depression, comparing assessment-only apps with multifeatured apps. We also investigated whether, what, and how additional app features may mitigate potential risks. METHODS: In this retrospective observational study, we identified apps in the Google Play store that provided a depression assessment as a feature and had at least five user comments. We separated apps into two categories based on those having only a depression assessment versus those that offered additional supportive features. We conducted theoretical thematic analyses over the user reviews, with thematic coding indicating the helpfulness of the app, the presence of suicidal ideation, and how and why the apps were used. We compared the results across the two categories of apps and analyzed the differences using chi-square statistical tests. RESULTS: We evaluated 6 apps; 3 provided only a depression assessment (assessment only), and 3 provided features in addition to self-assessment (multifeatured). User comments for assessment-only apps indicated significantly more suicidal ideation or self-harm (n=31, 9.4%) compared to comments for multifeatured apps (n=48, 2.3%; X=43.88, P<.001). Users of multifeatured apps were over three times more likely than assessment-only app users to comment in favor of the app's helpfulness, likely due to features like mood tracking, journaling, and informational resources (n=56, 17% vs n=1223, 59% respectively; X=200.36, P<.001). The number of users under the age of 18 years was significantly higher among assessment-only app users (n=40, 12%) than multifeatured app users (n=9, 0.04%; X=189.09, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Apps that diagnose depression by self-assessment without context or other supportive features are more likely to be used by those under 18 years of age and more likely to be associated with increased user distress and potential harm. Depression self-assessments in apps should be implemented with caution and accompanied by evidence-based capabilities that establish proper context, increase self-empowerment, and encourage users to seek clinical diagnostics and outside help.
背景:许多人使用应用程序来帮助了解和管理他们的抑郁症状。应用程序管理的抑郁症状问卷,如患者健康问卷-9,易于评分和在应用程序中实施,但可能没有提供适当支持和避免潜在伤害所需的基本资源和访问权限。
目的:我们的主要目标是评估使用应用程序自我诊断抑郁的风险和有益性,比较仅评估与多特征应用程序。我们还研究了额外的应用程序功能是否、是什么以及如何减轻潜在风险。
方法:在这项回顾性观察研究中,我们在 Google Play 商店中确定了提供抑郁评估作为功能且至少有 5 条用户评论的应用程序。我们根据仅进行抑郁评估的应用程序与提供其他支持功能的应用程序将应用程序分为两类。我们对用户评论进行了理论主题分析,主题编码表明应用程序的有用性、自杀意念的存在以及应用程序的使用方式和原因。我们比较了这两类应用程序的结果,并使用卡方统计检验分析了差异。
结果:我们评估了 6 个应用程序;其中 3 个仅提供抑郁评估(仅评估),3 个除了自我评估外还提供了其他功能(多特征)。仅评估应用程序的用户评论表明,自杀意念或自残的比例明显高于多特征应用程序的评论(分别为 31 人,9.4%和 48 人,2.3%;X=43.88,P<.001)。多特征应用程序用户评论表示应用程序有用的可能性是仅评估应用程序用户的三倍以上,这可能是由于情绪跟踪、日记和信息资源等功能(分别为 56 人,17%和 1223 人,59%;X=200.36,P<.001)。在仅评估应用程序用户中,年龄在 18 岁以下的用户比例明显高于多特征应用程序用户(分别为 40 人,12%和 9 人,0.04%;X=189.09,P<.001)。
结论:通过自我评估诊断抑郁症而没有上下文或其他支持性特征的应用程序更有可能被 18 岁以下的用户使用,并且更有可能与用户的痛苦增加和潜在伤害相关。在应用程序中实施抑郁自评时应谨慎,并应辅以基于证据的能力,以建立适当的背景、增强自我赋权,并鼓励用户寻求临床诊断和外部帮助。
J Med Internet Res. 2017-4-7
JMIR Ment Health. 2024-3-28
JMIR Form Res. 2021-12-14
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020-10-10
AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2022
BMJ Open. 2018-8-17
BJPsych Open. 2018-7
Ann Fam Med. 2018-7
J Med Internet Res. 2018-6-11
BMC Med Ethics. 2018-3-6