FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2990522015> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2990522015 endingPage "e14146" @default.
• W2990522015 startingPage "e14146" @default.
• W2990522015 abstract "Background Recent evidence in mobile health has demonstrated that, in some cases, apps are an effective way to improve health care delivery. Health care interventions delivered via mobile technology have demonstrated both practicality and affordability. Lately, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) interventions delivered over the internet have also shown a meaningful impact on patients with anxiety and depression. Objective Given the growing proliferation of smartphones and the trust in apps to support improved health behaviors and outcomes, we were interested in comparing a mobile app with Web-based methods for the delivery of CBT. This study aimed to compare the usability of a CBT mobile app called MoodTrainer with an evidence-based website called MoodGYM. Methods We used convenience sampling to recruit 30 students from a large Midwestern university and randomly assigned them to either MoodGYM or MoodTrainer user group. The trial period ran for 2 weeks, after which the students completed a self-assessment survey based on Nielsen heuristics. Statistical analysis was performed to compare the survey results from the 2 groups. We also compared the number of modules attempted or completed and the time spent on CBT strategies. Results The results indicate that the MoodTrainer app received a higher usability score when compared with MoodGYM. Overall, 87% (13/15) of the participants felt that it was easy to navigate through the MoodTrainer app compared with 80% (12/15) of the MoodGYM participants. All MoodTrainer participants agreed that the app was easy to use and did not require any external assistance, whereas only 67% (10/15) had the same opinion for MoodGYM. Furthermore, 67% (10/15) of the MoodTrainer participants found that the navigation controls were easy to locate compared with 80% (12/15) of the MoodGYM participants. MoodTrainer users, on an average, completed 2.5 modules compared with 1 module completed by MoodGYM users. Conclusions As among the first studies to directly compare the usability of a mobile app–based CBT with smartphone-specific features against a Web-based CBT, there is an opportunity for app-based CBT as at least in our limited trial, it was more usable and engaging. The study was limited to evaluate usability only and not the clinical effectiveness of the app." @default.
• W2990522015 created "2019-12-05" @default.
• W2990522015 creator A5011783797 @default.
• W2990522015 creator A5066101947 @default.
• W2990522015 creator A5075722115 @default.
• W2990522015 date "2020-01-31" @default.
• W2990522015 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2990522015 title "Engagement and Usability of a Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Mobile App Compared With Web-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Among College Students: Randomized Heuristic Trial" @default.
• W2990522015 cites W1545136906 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W163418743 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W1810469630 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W1967494979 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W1968667849 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W1998160684 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2008065712 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2029186305 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2039663770 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2045412353 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2078706883 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2079723265 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2081644697 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2100758079 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2101259217 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2105571318 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2133074847 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2138572504 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2142956558 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2154665841 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2157751048 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2158946645 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2164568274 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2167299310 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2195851723 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2278623125 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2419603765 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2467199219 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2469169105 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2531017459 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2560643553 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2754151110 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2768506072 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2769445571 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2883593716 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2889185986 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2905113313 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2911503598 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W4242521151 @default.
• W2990522015 cites W2612043373 @default.
• W2990522015 doi "https://doi.org/10.2196/14146" @default.
• W2990522015 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/7055853" @default.
• W2990522015 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32012043" @default.
• W2990522015 hasPublicationYear "2020" @default.
• W2990522015 type Work @default.
• W2990522015 sameAs 2990522015 @default.
• W2990522015 citedByCount "11" @default.
• W2990522015 countsByYear W29905220152020 @default.
• W2990522015 countsByYear W29905220152021 @default.
• W2990522015 countsByYear W29905220152022 @default.
• W2990522015 countsByYear W29905220152023 @default.
• W2990522015 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2990522015 hasAuthorship W2990522015A5011783797 @default.
• W2990522015 hasAuthorship W2990522015A5066101947 @default.
• W2990522015 hasAuthorship W2990522015A5075722115 @default.
• W2990522015 hasBestOaLocation W29905220151 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C107457646 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C110875604 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C118552586 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C136764020 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C160735492 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C170130773 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C27415008 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C2779363104 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C2780433410 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C2781265626 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C2988145974 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C50522688 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C558461103 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C70410870 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConcept C75630572 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConceptScore W2990522015C107457646 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConceptScore W2990522015C110875604 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConceptScore W2990522015C118552586 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConceptScore W2990522015C136764020 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConceptScore W2990522015C141071460 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConceptScore W2990522015C15744967 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConceptScore W2990522015C160735492 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConceptScore W2990522015C162324750 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConceptScore W2990522015C168563851 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConceptScore W2990522015C170130773 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConceptScore W2990522015C27415008 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConceptScore W2990522015C2779363104 @default.
• W2990522015 hasConceptScore W2990522015C2780433410 @default.

• next