↓ Skip to main content

Using Computerized Mental Health Programs in Alternative Education: Understanding the Requirements of Students and Staff

Overview of attention for article published in Health Communication, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
135 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Using Computerized Mental Health Programs in Alternative Education: Understanding the Requirements of Students and Staff
Published in
Health Communication, April 2017
DOI 10.1080/10410236.2017.1309620
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tuuli Kuosmanen, Theresa M. Fleming, Margaret M. Barry

Abstract

Computerized cognitive behavioral therapy (cCBT) programs have been shown to be both acceptable and effective with youth. However, their use with more vulnerable youth, such as early school leavers, remains relatively unstudied. This study explored student and staff attitudes toward the use of cCBT in an alternative education setting. Student and staff needs were assessed using the Requirements development approach (Van Velsen, Wentzel, & Van Gemert-Pijnen, 2013). An online staff survey (n = 16) was conducted to provide information on the context of delivery, and stakeholder requirements were further explored in four student workshops (n = 32) and staff group discussions (n = 12). Students' requirements in relation to program look and feel were reflective of issues with literacy and concentration. Activity- rather than text-based programs were considered easier to learn from, whereas attractive design with features such as connecting with others were thought necessary to keep young people engaged. Students wanted to learn practical skills on improving their mental health and well-being, using content that is positive, encouraging, and credible and that can be tailored to individual needs. Anonymity and voluntary participation were considered essential when delivering cCBT in the context of alternative education, as well as additional access from home to ensure timeliness of support. Staff required both flexibility and careful planning and timetabling in order to deliver cCBT in the alternative education setting and to support student engagement. The findings provide novel insight into the needs and preferences of vulnerable youth, with important implications for the implementation of computerized mental health programs in alternative education settings. A better understanding of user needs and preferences is critical for improving the uptake and impact of e-mental health resources.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 135 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 12%
Student > Bachelor 16 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 9%
Researcher 11 8%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 43 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 32 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 11%
Social Sciences 13 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 7%
Computer Science 3 2%
Other 14 10%
Unknown 49 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 April 2017.
All research outputs
#16,047,881
of 24,417,958 outputs
Outputs from Health Communication
#1,267
of 1,728 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,403
of 314,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Communication
#19
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,417,958 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,728 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,246 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.