The paradox of choice: user preferences and completion rates in single-session vs. multi-session digital mental health interventions.

IF 3.2 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Emily M Bowers, Korena S Klimczak, Ty B Aller, Michael E Levin
{"title":"The paradox of choice: user preferences and completion rates in single-session vs. multi-session digital mental health interventions.","authors":"Emily M Bowers, Korena S Klimczak, Ty B Aller, Michael E Levin","doi":"10.1080/16506073.2025.2512971","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) offer scalable solutions for addressing mental health needs, but low adherence remains a significant challenge. Single session DMHIs may offer a feasible alternative to address this issue, providing an accessible and low-effort option for users. The present study examines whether adding the choice of a single session DMHI in addition to a multi-session DMHI provides a feasible alternative for users who might otherwise disengage. This study examined naturalistic data from 509 university students who registered for a 12-session DMHI, single session DMHI, or both. The majority (58%) chose only the multi-session DMHI, while 24.2% chose only the single-session option, and 17.5% registered for both. Rates of completing one session of the chosen DMHI were highest for the single session DMHI (56.1%), with the lowest rates among those who registered for both programs. Users who chose the single session DMHI reported lower motivation and less frequent intentions to address mental health. Satisfaction with the single-session program was high. These results highlight the promise of single-session DMHIs as a feasible and acceptable intervention to help navigate adherence challenges with longer programs, while raising questions about the effectiveness of having users choose between single-session and multi-session DMHIs.</p>","PeriodicalId":10535,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Behaviour Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Behaviour Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/16506073.2025.2512971","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

Digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) offer scalable solutions for addressing mental health needs, but low adherence remains a significant challenge. Single session DMHIs may offer a feasible alternative to address this issue, providing an accessible and low-effort option for users. The present study examines whether adding the choice of a single session DMHI in addition to a multi-session DMHI provides a feasible alternative for users who might otherwise disengage. This study examined naturalistic data from 509 university students who registered for a 12-session DMHI, single session DMHI, or both. The majority (58%) chose only the multi-session DMHI, while 24.2% chose only the single-session option, and 17.5% registered for both. Rates of completing one session of the chosen DMHI were highest for the single session DMHI (56.1%), with the lowest rates among those who registered for both programs. Users who chose the single session DMHI reported lower motivation and less frequent intentions to address mental health. Satisfaction with the single-session program was high. These results highlight the promise of single-session DMHIs as a feasible and acceptable intervention to help navigate adherence challenges with longer programs, while raising questions about the effectiveness of having users choose between single-session and multi-session DMHIs.

选择悖论:单次会话与多次会话数字心理健康干预的用户偏好和完成率。
数字心理健康干预(DMHIs)为解决心理健康需求提供了可扩展的解决方案,但依从性低仍然是一个重大挑战。单次会话DMHIs可能为解决这个问题提供了一个可行的替代方案,为用户提供了一个可访问和低工作量的选择。本研究考察了除了多会话DMHI之外,添加单会话DMHI的选择是否为可能脱离用户的用户提供了可行的选择。这项研究调查了509名大学生的自然主义数据,他们注册了12期DMHI,单期DMHI,或两者兼有。大多数人(58%)只选择了多时段的DMHI,而24.2%的人只选择了单时段的选项,17.5%的人同时注册了两种选项。完成选定的DMHI的一个阶段的比率在单一阶段的DMHI中是最高的(56.1%),在注册了两个项目的人中是最低的。选择单次DMHI的用户报告动机较低,解决心理健康问题的意图较少。对单期课程的满意度很高。这些结果强调了单期DMHIs作为一种可行且可接受的干预措施的前景,可以帮助解决长期项目的依从性挑战,同时也提出了让用户在单期和多期DMHIs之间进行选择的有效性问题。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Cognitive Behaviour Therapy
Cognitive Behaviour Therapy PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Cognitive Behaviour Therapy is a peer reviewed, multidisciplinary journal devoted to the application of behavioural and cognitive sciences to clinical psychology and psychotherapy. The journal publishes state-of-the-art scientific articles within: - clinical and health psychology - psychopathology - behavioural medicine - assessment - treatment - theoretical issues pertinent to behavioural, cognitive and combined cognitive behavioural therapies With the number of high quality contributions increasing, the journal has been able to maintain a rapid publication schedule, providing readers with the latest research in the field.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信