Shane Cross , Ping Liu , Isabelle Scott , Shaunagh O'Sullivan , Jennifer Nicholas , Lee Valentine , Shaminka Mangelsdorf , Simon Baker , John Gleeson , Mario Alvarez-Jimenez
{"title":"Predicting clinical improvement in youth using a national-scale multicomponent digital mental health intervention","authors":"Shane Cross , Ping Liu , Isabelle Scott , Shaunagh O'Sullivan , Jennifer Nicholas , Lee Valentine , Shaminka Mangelsdorf , Simon Baker , John Gleeson , Mario Alvarez-Jimenez","doi":"10.1016/j.brat.2025.104703","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Youth mental health services are characterised by high demand and modest clinical outcomes. While digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) have been shown to be clinically effective, the relationship between DMHI use and outcome is unclear. The current study sought to identify the factors affecting the relationship between DMHI use and depression and anxiety symptom improvement in sub-groups of young people.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>An observational cohort design included young people aged 12–25 years engaging with a DMHI (MOST) from October 2020 to October 2023. The primary outcome was improvement at 12 weeks on the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ4). DMHIs were combinations of self-paced digital cognitive-behavioural therapy content, social network interactions, and professional support. A machine learning clustering algorithm was used to identify distinct user clusters based on baseline characteristics and multiple logistic regression models examined the relationship between DMHI usage and improvement.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Two distinct user clusters emerged, differing by symptom severity, age, service setting, and concurrent external treatment. 46.7% of “Severe” users and 39.8% of “Mild-Moderate” users significantly improved. Greater use of therapy content and professional support interactions were associated with improvement for the Mild-Moderate group only (OR = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.04–1.30, p = 0.008).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>While a greater proportion of users in the Severe group significantly improved, increased MOST use was associated with symptom improvement only for the Mild-Moderate group. These findings highlight the complexity of the relationship between DMHI use and outcome. Other unmeasured mediating or moderating factors such concurrent ‘offline’ treatment may help explain the results. Further research is required to better understand the relationship between DMHI use and clinical outcomes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48457,"journal":{"name":"Behaviour Research and Therapy","volume":"186 ","pages":"Article 104703"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behaviour Research and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005796725000257","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction
Youth mental health services are characterised by high demand and modest clinical outcomes. While digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) have been shown to be clinically effective, the relationship between DMHI use and outcome is unclear. The current study sought to identify the factors affecting the relationship between DMHI use and depression and anxiety symptom improvement in sub-groups of young people.
Method
An observational cohort design included young people aged 12–25 years engaging with a DMHI (MOST) from October 2020 to October 2023. The primary outcome was improvement at 12 weeks on the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ4). DMHIs were combinations of self-paced digital cognitive-behavioural therapy content, social network interactions, and professional support. A machine learning clustering algorithm was used to identify distinct user clusters based on baseline characteristics and multiple logistic regression models examined the relationship between DMHI usage and improvement.
Results
Two distinct user clusters emerged, differing by symptom severity, age, service setting, and concurrent external treatment. 46.7% of “Severe” users and 39.8% of “Mild-Moderate” users significantly improved. Greater use of therapy content and professional support interactions were associated with improvement for the Mild-Moderate group only (OR = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.04–1.30, p = 0.008).
Conclusion
While a greater proportion of users in the Severe group significantly improved, increased MOST use was associated with symptom improvement only for the Mild-Moderate group. These findings highlight the complexity of the relationship between DMHI use and outcome. Other unmeasured mediating or moderating factors such concurrent ‘offline’ treatment may help explain the results. Further research is required to better understand the relationship between DMHI use and clinical outcomes.
期刊介绍:
The major focus of Behaviour Research and Therapy is an experimental psychopathology approach to understanding emotional and behavioral disorders and their prevention and treatment, using cognitive, behavioral, and psychophysiological (including neural) methods and models. This includes laboratory-based experimental studies with healthy, at risk and subclinical individuals that inform clinical application as well as studies with clinically severe samples. The following types of submissions are encouraged: theoretical reviews of mechanisms that contribute to psychopathology and that offer new treatment targets; tests of novel, mechanistically focused psychological interventions, especially ones that include theory-driven or experimentally-derived predictors, moderators and mediators; and innovations in dissemination and implementation of evidence-based practices into clinical practice in psychology and associated fields, especially those that target underlying mechanisms or focus on novel approaches to treatment delivery. In addition to traditional psychological disorders, the scope of the journal includes behavioural medicine (e.g., chronic pain). The journal will not consider manuscripts dealing primarily with measurement, psychometric analyses, and personality assessment.