Application of an Adapted Health Action Process Approach Model to Predict Engagement With a Digital Mental Health Website: Cross-Sectional Study.

IF 2.6 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES JMIR Human Factors Pub Date : 2024-08-07 DOI:10.2196/57082
Julien Rouvere, Brittany E Blanchard, Morgan Johnson, Isabell Griffith Fillipo, Brittany Mosser, Meghan Romanelli, Theresa Nguyen, Kevin Rushton, John Marion, Tim Althoff, Patricia A Areán, Michael D Pullmann
{"title":"Application of an Adapted Health Action Process Approach Model to Predict Engagement With a Digital Mental Health Website: Cross-Sectional Study.","authors":"Julien Rouvere, Brittany E Blanchard, Morgan Johnson, Isabell Griffith Fillipo, Brittany Mosser, Meghan Romanelli, Theresa Nguyen, Kevin Rushton, John Marion, Tim Althoff, Patricia A Areán, Michael D Pullmann","doi":"10.2196/57082","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Digital Mental Health (DMH) tools are an effective, readily accessible, and affordable form of mental health support. However, sustained engagement with DMH is suboptimal, with limited research on DMH engagement. The Health Action Process Approach (HAPA) is an empirically supported theory of health behavior adoption and maintenance. Whether this model also explains DMH tool engagement remains unknown.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study examined whether an adapted HAPA model predicted engagement with DMH via a self-guided website.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Visitors to the Mental Health America (MHA) website were invited to complete a brief survey measuring HAPA constructs. This cross-sectional study tested the adapted HAPA model with data collected using voluntary response sampling from 16,078 sessions (15,619 unique IP addresses from United States residents) on the MHA website from October 2021 through February 2022. Model fit was examined via structural equation modeling in predicting two engagement outcomes: (1) choice to engage with DMH (ie, spending 3 or more seconds on an MHA page, excluding screening pages) and (2) level of engagement (ie, time spent on MHA pages and number of pages visited, both excluding screening pages).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants chose to engage with the MHA website in 94.3% (15,161/16,078) of the sessions. Perceived need (β=.66; P<.001), outcome expectancies (β=.49; P<.001), self-efficacy (β=.44; P<.001), and perceived risk (β=.17-.18; P<.001) significantly predicted intention, and intention (β=.77; P<.001) significantly predicted planning. Planning was not significantly associated with choice to engage (β=.03; P=.18). Within participants who chose to engage, the association between planning with level of engagement was statistically significant (β=.12; P<.001). Model fit indices for both engagement outcomes were poor, with the adapted HAPA model accounting for only 0.1% and 1.4% of the variance in choice to engage and level of engagement, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our data suggest that the HAPA model did not predict engagement with DMH via a self-guided website. More research is needed to identify appropriate theoretical frameworks and practical strategies (eg, digital design) to optimize DMH tool engagement.</p>","PeriodicalId":36351,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Human Factors","volume":"11 ","pages":"e57082"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11339574/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Human Factors","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/57082","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Digital Mental Health (DMH) tools are an effective, readily accessible, and affordable form of mental health support. However, sustained engagement with DMH is suboptimal, with limited research on DMH engagement. The Health Action Process Approach (HAPA) is an empirically supported theory of health behavior adoption and maintenance. Whether this model also explains DMH tool engagement remains unknown.

Objective: This study examined whether an adapted HAPA model predicted engagement with DMH via a self-guided website.

Methods: Visitors to the Mental Health America (MHA) website were invited to complete a brief survey measuring HAPA constructs. This cross-sectional study tested the adapted HAPA model with data collected using voluntary response sampling from 16,078 sessions (15,619 unique IP addresses from United States residents) on the MHA website from October 2021 through February 2022. Model fit was examined via structural equation modeling in predicting two engagement outcomes: (1) choice to engage with DMH (ie, spending 3 or more seconds on an MHA page, excluding screening pages) and (2) level of engagement (ie, time spent on MHA pages and number of pages visited, both excluding screening pages).

Results: Participants chose to engage with the MHA website in 94.3% (15,161/16,078) of the sessions. Perceived need (β=.66; P<.001), outcome expectancies (β=.49; P<.001), self-efficacy (β=.44; P<.001), and perceived risk (β=.17-.18; P<.001) significantly predicted intention, and intention (β=.77; P<.001) significantly predicted planning. Planning was not significantly associated with choice to engage (β=.03; P=.18). Within participants who chose to engage, the association between planning with level of engagement was statistically significant (β=.12; P<.001). Model fit indices for both engagement outcomes were poor, with the adapted HAPA model accounting for only 0.1% and 1.4% of the variance in choice to engage and level of engagement, respectively.

Conclusions: Our data suggest that the HAPA model did not predict engagement with DMH via a self-guided website. More research is needed to identify appropriate theoretical frameworks and practical strategies (eg, digital design) to optimize DMH tool engagement.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
应用改编的健康行动过程方法模型预测数字心理健康网站的参与度:横断面研究。
背景:数字心理健康(DMH)工具是一种有效、易于获取且价格合理的心理健康支持形式。然而,人们对数字心理健康工具的持续参与度并不理想,对数字心理健康工具参与度的研究也很有限。健康行动过程方法 (Health Action Process Approach,HAPA) 是一种得到经验支持的健康行为采纳和维持理论。该模型是否也能解释 DMH 工具的参与情况,目前仍是未知数:本研究考察了改编后的 HAPA 模型是否能预测通过自助网站参与 DMH 的情况:方法:邀请美国心理健康协会(MHA)网站的访问者完成一项简短的调查,测量HAPA的构建。这项横断面研究利用从 2021 年 10 月到 2022 年 2 月在美国心理健康协会网站上从 16,078 次会话(15,619 个来自美国居民的唯一 IP 地址)中收集的自愿响应抽样数据,对改编后的 HAPA 模型进行了测试。通过结构方程模型检验了模型在预测两种参与结果方面的拟合度:(1)选择参与 DMH(即在 MHA 页面上花费 3 秒或更多时间,不包括筛选页面)和(2)参与程度(即在 MHA 页面上花费的时间和访问的页面数量,均不包括筛选页面):结果:94.3%(15,161/16,078)的参与者选择访问 MHA 网站。感知需求(β=.66;PC结论:我们的数据表明,HAPA模型能够满足参与者的感知需求:我们的数据表明,HAPA 模型并不能预测通过自助网站参与 DMH 的情况。需要进行更多的研究来确定适当的理论框架和实践策略(如数字设计),以优化 DMH 工具的参与度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
JMIR Human Factors
JMIR Human Factors Medicine-Health Informatics
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
3.70%
发文量
123
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Mobility-Based Smartphone Digital Phenotypes for Unobtrusively Capturing Everyday Cognition, Mood, and Community Life-Space in Older Adults: Feasibility, Acceptability, and Preliminary Validity Study. The Promise of AI for Image-Driven Medicine: Qualitative Interview Study of Radiologists' and Pathologists' Perspectives. Mobile App for Improving the Mental Health of Youth in Out-of-Home Care: Development Study Using an Intervention Mapping Approach. German Version of the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire and Derived Short Questionnaires for Usability and Perceived Usefulness in Health Care Assessment in Telehealth and Digital Therapeutics: Instrument Validation Study. Exploring Patient, Proxy, and Clinician Perspectives on the Value and Impact of an Inpatient Portal: A Reflexive Thematic Analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1